//.  2-0.2-$. 

LIBRARY  OF  THE  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 

PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


Purchased  by  the  Hamill  Missionary  Fund. 


Division  MM? 

Section VJL 


✓ 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


* 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


BY 

CLAUDE  H.  VAN  TYNE 

HEAD  OF  THE  DEPARTMENT  OF  HISTORY  IN  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF 
MICHIGAN  ;  AUTHOR  OF  “THE  CAUSES  OF  THE  WAR  OF 
INDEPENDENCE,”  “THE  AMERICAN  REVOLUTION,” 

AND  "THE  LOYALISTS  IN  THE  AMERICAN 
REVOLUTION” 


D.  APPLETON  AND  COMPANY 

NEW  YORK  ::  LONDON  ::  MCMXXIII 


COPYRIGHT,  1923,  BY 

D.  APPLETON  AND  COMPANY 


PRINTED  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES  OF  AMERICA 


TC 

HON.  CLARENCE  M.  BURTON 

GENEROUS  FRIEND  AND  FELLOW  HISTORIAN 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2019  with  funding  from 
Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


https://archive.org/details/indiainfermentOOvant 


PREFACE 


During  the  winter  of  1921-1922  there  was  a 
unique  political  situation  in  India,  perhaps  without 
a  parallel  in  the  history  of  the  world.  On  the  assur¬ 
ance  of  a  friend  that  every  door  in  India  would  be 
open  to  me,  I  was  tempted  to  go  and  see  the  situation 
for  myself.  In  India  I  talked  with  representatives 
of  all  points  of  view  from  “Mahatma”  Gandhi,  the 
greatest  of  Indian  leaders,  to  Lord  Reading,  the 
Viceroy  of  India.  It  was  my  privilege  to  sit  at  the 
council  table  with  the  bitterest  enemies  of  the  British 
regime,  to  listen  to  the  most  seditious  talk  about  it, 
and  then  to  sit  with  governors  of  provinces  and  with 
their  ministers  of  state  and  get  their  “angle  of 
vision.”  In  Allipore  jail  in  Calcutta  I  enjoyed  nearly 
two  hours’  confidential  talk  with  C.  R.  Das,  the  great 
Bengal  leader  of  the  extremists,  and  not  long  after 
I  sat  in  the  Bengal  Legislative  Council  watching  at 
their  work  the  lawmakers  for  40,000,000  people.  In 
Delhi  I  listened  for  two  weeks  to  the  debates  in  the 
Legislative  Assembly  and  held  converse  with  mem¬ 
bers  of  every  faction  in  it.  I  talked  with  rajahs  and 
maharajahs  and  nawabs.  I  went  with  collectors  and 
subdivisional  officers  into  villages,  and  there  through 


Vll 


PREFACE 


some  local  officer  asked  questions  of  the  assembled 
villagers.  Into  courts  high  and  low,  into  offices  of 
collectors  and  commissioners,  wherever  government 
touched  the  people,  I  pried  in  the  hope  that  I  might 
learn  for  myself  the  facts  in  the  strangely  complex 
problem  of  Indian  politics. 

The  British  Government  had  just  created  the  In¬ 
dian  Legislative  Assembly,  a  “Parliament  in  em¬ 
bryo, ”  and  had  pledged  themselves  to  give  India 
self-government  as  fast  as  she  demonstrated  her  fit¬ 
ness  for  it.  Indians  who  claimed  to  be  the  repre¬ 
sentatives  of  320,000,000  of  people,  one  fifth  of  the 
inhabitants  of  the  globe,  were  declaring  to  the  world 
that  those  mute  masses  were  trembling  with  a  desire 
to  be  free  from  the  British  rule.  In  our  own  country 
a  consistent  and  powerful  enemy  of  Great  Britain 
with  unrivaled  press  facilities  was  spreading  among 
millions  of  ignorant  American  readers  stories  of 
British  misrule  utterly  without  foundation.  Fed  by 
a  Washington  agency  of  Indian  extremists,  the  rad¬ 
ical  American  press  teemed  day  after  day  with  the 
fantastic  products  of  licentious  imaginations.  Im¬ 
ported  agitators  appeared  on  the  platform  paid  by 
our  parlor  Bolshevists  who  delight  in  financing  any 
cause  which  promises  to  turn  the  world  upside  down. 
“Revolutions  are  such  fun,”  was  their  cry.  “On  with 
the  propaganda,  never  mind  the  truth,”  seemed  their 
watchword.  We  were  told,  for  example,  that  the 

Malabar  tragedy  in  India  was  caused  by  an  English 

•  •  • 
vm 


PREFACE 


officer  putting  poison  gas  in  the  car  with  the  im¬ 
prisoned  Moplahs,  a  yarn  which  even  the  most  lurid 
agitator  in  India  never  thought  to  invent.  To  seek 
out  the  truth,  if  that  was  attainable  where  the  prob¬ 
lem  was  so  complex,  I  went  to  India. 

My  obligation  is  deep  to  those  who  made  that  pos¬ 
sible.  President  M.  L.  Burton  of  the  University  of 
Michigan  took  up  the  matter  with  enthusiasm,  in¬ 
duced  generous  alumni  of  the  university  to  finance 
the  expense  of  the  journey,  and  secured  from  the 
liberal-minded  Board  of  Regents  a  leave  of  absence 
for  five  months.  The  donors  of  the  travel  fund  were 
Hon.  C.  M.  Burton,  J.  W.  Beaumont,  Wm.  R.  Kales, 
Hal  H.  Smith,  Julian  H.  Harris,  Paul  R.  Gray, 
Henry  M.  Campbell,  C.  H.  Campbell,  Clarence  A. 
Lightner,  Stanley  G.  Stevens,  Wm.  L.  Jenks,  Oscar 
Webber,  Wm.  G.  Sharp,  Earl  D.  Babst,  Bryant 
Walker,  John  R.  Russell,  Walter  L.  Russell,  R.  P. 
Lamont  and  P.  W.  A.  Fitzsimmons. 

In  India  my  obligations  were  so  great,  and  to  so 
many  Englishmen  and  Indians  of  all  parties,  that  it 
must  suffice  to  mention  the  greatest  debt  of  all,  that 
to  Sir  Frederick  Whyte,  who  lavishly  expended  his 
own  hospitality  and  drew  heavy  drafts  on  the  kind¬ 
ness  of  his  friends  so  that  I  never  was  without  a 
hospitable  home  and  a  guiding  hand  from  the  mo¬ 
ment  when,  a  thousand  miles  out  at  sea,  I  received 
a  wireless  from  the  Governor  of  Bombay  offering  his 
hospitality  on  my  arrival,  until,  after  traveling  5,000 


IX 


PREFACE 


miles  in  India,  I  left  the  generous  table  of  the  Gov¬ 
ernor  of  Ceylon  to  go  aboard  my  home-bound  ship 
in  the  harbor  at  Colombo. 

In  closing  this  preface  I  desire  to  say  just  what 
I  feel  that  I  am  competent  to  do,  and  what  I  have 
tried  to  do  in  this  little  volume.  I  am  not  an  author¬ 
ity  on  Indian  history  or  institutions,  and  have  read, 
perhaps,  not  over  twenty  books  on  India,  together 
with  numerous  contemporary  political  pamphlets  and 
a  rather  wide  range  of  both  radical  and  conservative 
newspapers  appearing  while  I  was  traveling  in  India 
or  sent  to  me  since  my  return.  My  life  has  been 
spent  in  studying,  writing  and  teaching  American 
history.  Therefore,  I  took  to  India  no  special  knowl¬ 
edge  of  it,  but  merely  a  mind  trained  to  a  study  of 
the  social  sciences  and  to  observe  political  activities 
past  and  present.  Except  where  explanatory  matter 
gathered  from  books  was  necessary  I  have  tried  to 
tell  only  what  I  saw  or  heard.  I  have  expressed  opin¬ 
ions  for  which  those  who  disagree  will  criticize  me, 
but  the  thing  of  real  value  in  the  book  is,  I  believe, 
the  attempted  accurate  report  of  things  said  to  me  by 
actors  in  the  great  drama  going  on  around  me  as  I 
traveled.  As  soon  as  I  had  had  a  conversation  I  put 
down  in  my  notebooks  every  scrap  I  could  recall. 
Never  was  there  more  than  a  few  hours  between 
the  interview  and  the  entry  in  my  notes.  Wherever 
I  would  not  violate  a  confidence  or  commit  an  indis¬ 
cretion  by  telling  who  it  was  that  said  a  thing  to  me 


x 


PREFACE 


I  have  given  the  person’s  name  so  that  the  value  of 
this  contemporary  account  might  be  enhanced. 

Indian  critics  of  my  articles  in  the  July  and  Sep¬ 
tember  (1922)  issues  of  the  Atlantic  Monthly  say 
that  I  was  prejudiced  by  English  officials,  that  I 
“opened  the  wrong  doors,”  and  even  “British  gold” 
has  been  darkly  hinted,  but  to  all  that  I  can  only 
assert  that  I  spent  more  time  interviewing  “non¬ 
cooperators”  and  nationalists  than  I  did  “sun-dried 
bureaucrats,”  and  if  there  was  any  “British  gold” 
ready  for  my  itching  palm  I  was  too  stupid  to  realize 
it.  Indeed,  the  only  finesse  I  suspected  in  my  British 
friends  was  too  great  eagerness  to  have  me  meet  all 
the  most  extreme  Indian  agitators,  even  opening  the 
jail  doors  that  I  might  talk  with  them.  Of  course, 
I  did  look  at  the  Indian  life  with  Western  eyes,  and 
I  brought  all  my  American  prejudices  in  favor  of 
cleanliness,  sanitation,  hygiene,  universal  education, 
and  the  necessity  of  training  for  political  fitness.  I 
found  myself  not  so  sympathetic  with  superstition, 
religious  fanaticism,  and  the  mystic  Indian  philoso¬ 
phy  as  old  English  residents  in  India,  the  “bureau¬ 
crats,”  against  whom  my  radical  Indian  acquaint¬ 
ances  raged.  But,  at  least,  I  have  tried  honestly  to 
give  the  impression  which  Indian  life  and  Indian 
politics  at  a  most  interesting  time  in  India’s  history 
made  upon  an  academic  American. 

Of  India,  the  great  continent,  with  its  many  races, 
religions,  and  castes,  with  its  varied  climates,  soils, 


xi 


PREFACE 


and  products,  a  lifetime  does  not  suffice  to  gain  full¬ 
ness  of  knowledge;  but  if  there  is  value  in  a  survey 
at  a  moment  when  political  agitation  has  touched  the 
masses  of  Indian  peoples,  for  perhaps  the  first  time 
in  their  long  history,  it  may  not  be  overbold  to 
assume  that  an  account  of  the  survey  is  worthwhile. 

I  must  not  close  this  preface  without  an  expres¬ 
sion  of  my  deep  obligation  to  my  friend,  Professor 
Campbell  Bonner,  who  has  read  the  proofs  with  the 
greatest  care  and  saved  me  from  some  humiliating 
errors  which  would  otherwise  have  marred  these 
pages.  I  have  also  been  constantly  aided  in  this  task 
by  my  devoted  wife,  faithful  as  ever  through  all  the 
drudgery  of  book-making. 

Finally,  I  am  obliged  to  Mr.  Ellery  Sedgwick  of 
the  Atlantic  Monthly,  for  the  privilege  of  using  in 
this  book  the  material  which  appeared  in  that 
magazine. 


Claude  H.  Van  Tyne. 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  PAGE 

Preface . vii 

I.  The  Indian  Problem  and  Its  Imme¬ 
diate  Background .  I 

II.  The  Government  of  India  Act;  Its 

Critics  and  Its  Defenders  ...  16 

III.  The  Indian  Legislative  Assembly  .  36 

IV.  The  Reaction  of  Princes,  Officials, 

Capital,  Hindu  and  Moslem  to  the 
Reforms . 58 

V.  Mahatma  Gandhi,  Saint  or  Dema¬ 
gogue  . 95 

VI.  Non-violent  Non-cooperation  .  .  115 

VII.  Indian  Arraignment  of  the  Brit¬ 
ish  Government . 140 

VIII.  British  Service  to  India,  and  the 
Probable  Result  if  They  With¬ 
draw  . 170 

IX.  The  Spirituality  of  the  East  and  the 

Material  Civilization  of  the  West  194 

X.  Indian  Political  Fitness  and 

Auguries  for  the  Future  .  .  .  219 

Index . •  .  .  241 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 

I 

THE  INDIAN  PROBLEM  AND  ITS 
IMMEDIATE  BACKGROUND 

India  challenges  the  world’s  attention  as  never 
before.  Great  and  inevitable  changes  are  going  on 
there,  beyond  the  power  of  any  viceroy  to  check  or 
even  to  retard.  The  political  tides  of  the  world  are 
sweeping  the  Indian  people  on  to  goals  unseen,  per¬ 
haps  to  rocks  and  shoals  they  know  not  of.  It  is  a 
most  pathetic  situation.  Indians,  great  and  good 
men,  yearn  for  self-rule — swaraj — as  it  is  called. 
Spiritually,  as  they  insistently  claim,  the  educated 
classes  might  be  ready  for  it ;  but  practically,  the  out¬ 
look  is  very  dark.  If  it  came  suddenly,  to-morrow, 
as  Gandhi  would  have  it,  all  logic  suggests  invasion, 
famine,  plague,  internecine  war,  chaos;  and  yet  it 
can  be  argued  that  the  very  habits  of  peace  and  order 
which  the  British  have  given  India,  the  very  lessons 


I 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


of  sanitation  and  hygiene  which  their  regime  has 
taught,  might  tide  the  experiment  over  to  a  better 
day.  The  risk  is  great,  the  goal  most  alluring.  High- 
spirited,  impatient  Indians,  with  no  fortune  to  lose, 
wish  to  dare  all;  cautious,  judicious,  conservative 
men,  with  worldly  goods  and  social  positions  to  be 
risked,  urge  delay. 

When  I  saw  the  “squalid  splendor”  of  Benares, 
and  passed  down  to  the  river  bank  through  throngs 
of  pilgrims  who  parted  timidly  before  me  when  my 
guide  (a  miserable  little  rat  who  would  have  passed 
unnoticed  alone)  shouted,  “Make  way  for  the  Sahib,” 
I  said  to  myself,  Can  this  timid,  cowering  herd  ever 
hope  to  win  and  maintain  self-rule?  But  later,  at 
His  Excellency’s  dinner  at  Government  House  in 
Lucknow,  I  walked  among  nawabs  and  rajahs  and 
talukdars,  glorious  fellows,  proud  of  carriage,  with 
full-orbed,  glistening  eyes,  dark  sleek  skins,  black 
haughty  mustaches,  who  dressed  in  long,  close-fitting 
coats  of  smooth  velvet,  ornamented  with  gold  chains, 
and  whose  fine  heads  were  wrapped  in  rich  dark  tur¬ 
bans.  I  wondered,  as  I  saw  that  impressive  sight, 
whether  my  former  doubts  were  justified.  Again,  at 
Viceregal  Lodge  at  Delhi,  as  I  sat  at  the  state  dinner 
in  honor  of  the  Prince  of  Wales,  and  looked  with  ad- 


2 


THE  INDIAN  PROBLEM 


miration  at  the  noble  forms  and  aristocratic  bearing 
of  rajahs  and  maharajahs,  and  famous  Indian  minis¬ 
ters  of  State,  and  noted  their  strong,  dark  faces,  and 
recalled  from  the  previous  day  the  long  columns  of 
splendid  Punjabi  soldiers,  I  began  to  waver  and  to 
admit  that  the  problem  of  India  has  many  aspects. 

As  I  sat  in  the  great  canopied  space  before  the 
noble  hall  of  audience  of  the  old  Delhi  Fort,  where, 
on  the  “peacock  throne,”  the  Mogul  Emperors  had 
once  ruled,  and  saw  the  barbaric  splendor,  the  gleam 
of  jewels,  and  the  riot  of  color  in  the  dresses  of  forty 
Indian  princes  ranged  on  either  side  of  the  raised 
dais  where  sat  the  Prince  of  Wales  and  the  Viceroy 
of  India  during  the  great  Darbar;  as  I  looked  below 
them  to  the  members  of  the  Legislative  Assembly 
and  the  Council  of  State  sitting  at  their  feet,  it  was 
startling  to  reflect  that  all  over  India  the  subjects  of 
these  absolute  despots,  of  these  princes  sitting  there 
covered  with  dazzling  jewels,  whose  price  had  been 
wrung  from  their  poor  peasantry,  were  giving  un¬ 
questioning  obedience;  while,  throughout  British 
India,  the  people  for  whom  the  British  had  lately 
devised  a  representative  system,  which  was  intended 
to  give  them  a  share  in  their  own  government,  were 
seething  with  discontent,  and  dreaming  if  not  actu- 

3 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


ally  practicing  “civil  disobedience”  against  the  laws 
enacted  by  the  Viceroy  in  Council  with  this  legis¬ 
lative  body  before  me.  Was  all  the  Indian  unrest 
based  after  all  on  race  hatred,  and  not  at  all  on  un¬ 
satisfied  political  aspirations? 

It  would  require  a  patient  reader  if  we  should 
attempt  to  trace  all  the  causes  of  the  present  Indian 
ferment.  One  might  go  back  to  the  famous  Indian 
Mutiny,  or  further,  to  find  the  source  of  that  trick¬ 
ling  stream  of  discontent  which  has  now  become  the 
swollen  torrent  of  race  hatred  and  passion  for 
nationalism.  It  must  suffice  to  say  that  after  the 
mutiny  of  1857  the  need  and  the  fascination  of  re¬ 
storing  order  out  of  chaos  was  so  great  for  every 
administrator  in  India  that  wherever  efficiency  was 
desired  a  British  agency  was  substituted  for  an 
Indian  agency.  As  a  result,  the  Government 
of  India  came  to  be  even  more  than  before  the 
mutiny  a  benevolent  despotism,  aiming  on  the  whole, 
however,  to  found  “British  greatness  on  Indian 
happiness.” 

Of  the  Indian  Civil  Service  during  most  of  the 
time  since  the  mutiny,  one  may  say  it  is  perhaps  the 
best  and  most  incorruptible  the  world  has  seen,  but 
too  aware  of  its  own  virtues.  It  often  wraps  itself 

4 


THE  INDIAN  PROBLEM 


smugly  in  a  cloak  of  goodness  and  infallibility.  It 
cannot  conceive  of  a  people  who  do  not  want  to  be 
ruled  well  and  justly,  but  who  would  prefer  a  rule 
which  might  be  a  poor  thing,  but  their  own.  Even 
from  the  most  imaginative  Indian  agitator,  however, 
one  no  longer  hears  of  Thackeray’s  nabob,  the 
jaundiced  monster  “who  purchased  the  estates  of 
broken-down  English  gentlemen  with  rupees  tor¬ 
tured  out  of  bleeding  rajahs,  who  smoked  a  hookah 
in  public,  and  in  private  carried  about  a  guilty  con¬ 
science,  diamonds  of  untold  value,  and  a  diseased 
liver;  who  had  a  vulgar  wife  with  a  retinue  of  black 
servants  whom  she  maltreated.”  All  that,  if  it  ever 
existed,  has  gone  with  the  growth  of  British  con¬ 
science  and  government’s  altruistic  purposes. 

Although  I  have  heard  the  worst  from  Great 
Britain’s  most  virulent  Indian  critics,  considerable 
reading  and  some  personal  observation  have  con¬ 
vinced  me  that  most  British  administrators  in  India 
have  carried  well  a  laborious  and  often  thankless 
task  with  an  unselfish  desire  to  rule  for  India’s 
good  and  to  adhere  to  a  high  standard  of  official 
rectitude.  Of  selfishness  and  self-seeking  there  has 
been  astonishingly  little.  Ambitions,  family  ties, 
health  and  often  life  itself  have  been  sacrificed  to 

5 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


the  end  of  serving  India  well.  I  found  the  Indian 
Civil  Service  men  taking  pleasure  in  their  sense  of 
responsibility,  sometimes  a  little  vain  that  a  million 
people  or  so  depended  upon  their  wisdom,  but  over¬ 
topping  all  was  a  high  sense  of  duty  and  devotion 
to  it.  No  finer  civil  servants  can  be  found  in  the 
world  than  James  Lindsay,  collector  and  magistrate 
in  Dacca,  and  George  W.  Padisson  who  long  had 
a  similar  office  in  the  Madras  district  and  who  is 
now  the  Commissioner  of  Labor  there. 

The  Collector  is  the  really  great  man  in  the  every¬ 
day  Indian  life.  He  administers  justice  and  settles 
disputes.  It  is  all  very  simple,  done  in  a  modest  un¬ 
pretentious  office  with  only  a  desk,  a  chair  and  a 
few  benches.  The  Indians  stand  in  groups  before 
the  desk,  talking  with  astounding  volubility  when 
given  permission.  They  are  most  obsequious  to  the 
Collector,  bowing,  bringing  their  hands  together 
sometimes  in  the  manner  of  prayer.  He  is  kind  but 
firm,  gives  decisions  with  an  air  of  finality  that 
stops  all  complaint.  The  loser  looks  dissatisfied  but 
nothing  more.  Some  of  the  suitors  lie  with  the 
greatest  glibness,  but  do  not  resent  being  shown  to 
be  liars.  In  even  remote  parts  of  India,  lonely,  in 
places  of  danger,  amid  malaria  and  the  feverous  heat 

6 


THE  INDIAN  PROBLEM 


of  the  jungle,  the  Collector  and  his  subdivisional 
officers  keep  up  the  British  reputation  for  justice. 
Joseph  Sedley,  Collector  of  Bogley  Wollah,  had,  it 
will  be  recalled  by  readers  of  Vanity  Fair ,  lived  for 
about  eight  years,  “quite  alone,  at  this  charming 
place,  scarcely  seeing  a  Christian  face.”  Alluding  to 
Thackeray  reminds  me  that  in  India  one  comes  upon 
many  a  Colonel  Newcome  and  a  Major  Pendennis 
and  I  am  sure  that  I  met  the  original  Mrs.  Major 
O’Dowd,  at  least  one  who  had  inherited  all  of  her 
vulgarity.  Although  I  heard  much  praise,  yet  I  also 
heard  much  criticism  of  these  Civil  Service  men. 
Some  held  that  they  were  men  of  only  average  attain¬ 
ments  and  rather  limited  outlook,  who  had  merely 
sought  a  living  in  a  land  where  they  took  little  per¬ 
sonal  interest. 

H.  Fielding  Hall  holds  that  the  secret  of  British 
success  in  the  early  days  Was  the  personality  of  their 
officers.  He  cites  Clive,  Warren  Hastings,  Have¬ 
lock,  Lawrence  and  Nicholson,  who  went  out  in  their 
youth,  when  eighteen  or  twenty.  They  were  not 
overeducatea,  and  could,  therefore,  think  and  see 
facts.  To  Hall,  there  were  giants  in  those  days,  all 
gone  now,  and  an  “efficient  machine  wjth  minds 
closed  rigidly,  enforcing  the  law  untempered  to  the 

7 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


#"'■  "'"l  '■  "  —  ■»  ■  —  .  ''  ■  .  I  I.  I  ■!■■■■■—  .  I  ■ 

shorn  lamb  by  personalities.”  In  the  old  days  a 
stranger’s  laws,  methods  and  ideas  became  bearable 
through  the  filter  of  officials  with  common  sense. 
Now,  Hall  holds,  these  Indian  Civil  Servants  deal 
only  with  books,  papers  and  records,  and  not  with  a 
life  which  they  have  learned  to  understand  through 
the  acquisition  of  the  native  languages.  Once  the 
Collector  administered  justice,  now  law,  says  Hall. 
I  found  some  Indians  who  agreed  with  this  judg¬ 
ment,  but  a  number  of  old  men  with  sagacious  minds 
assured  me  that  the  arraignment  was  quite  unjust. 
Certainly  it  was  not  true  of  such  Collectors  and 
subordinates  as  I  met,  but,  of  course,  my  acquaint¬ 
ances  were  limited.  In  spite  of  the  spirit  of  criticism, 
I  feel  sure  that  if  the  best  Indian  Civil  Servants  and 
the  more  reasonable  Indian  Nationalists  can  be  made 
to  understand  each  other  they  will  get  on  well 
together.  Each  group  is  right-minded  on  the  whole 
and  wishes  the  right  to  prevail.  As  Lionel  Curtis 
says,  there  is  no  wall  but  only  the  phantom  of  a  wall 
between  them. 

Good  as  the  administration  was,  it  came,  as  a 
result  of  events  and  conditions  I  have  no  time  to 
trace,  to  be  bitterly  resented  by  the  western-educated 
Indian,  and  feeling  had  risen  high  against  this  alien 

8 


THE  INDIAN  PROBLEM 


rule  before,  in  1909,  the  Indian  Councils  Act,  chief 
of  the  Morley-Minto  reforms,  attempted  to  appease 
Indian  demands. 

Perhaps  too  many  of  India’s  “reforms”  have  been 
the  work  of  ill-informed  Secretaries  of  State  and 
Viceroys  who  strutted  a  few  years  on  the  Indian 
stage,  and  who  preferred  their  own  ill-matured  views 
to  those  of  old  and  faithful  officials  whose  lives  had 
been  passed  amidst  the  Indian  people.  Such  men 
could  talk  nobly  about  imparting  “divine  discontent” 
to  those  millions  who,  dwelling  in  the  ever-silent 
spaces,  were  sunk  in  a  pathetic  slave  spirit.  Men  of 
that  mentality  could  never  free  themselves  of  the 
western  fetish  of  representative  institutions  and  of 
the  value  of  debating  assemblies  to  cultivate  the 
power  of  criticizing  Government. 

With  utmost  brevity  we  may  note  that  the  Morley- 
Minto  plan  of  1909  enlarged  the  membership  and 
the  functions  of  the  Indian  Legislative  Councils, 
placing  them  on  an  elective  basis,  diluted  with  nomi¬ 
nations  by  Government.  An  Indian  member  was 
taken  into  the  Viceroy’s  Council  and  two  Indian 
members  into  the  Council  of  the  Secretary  of  State 
in  London.  The  elected  members  of  the  Legislative 
Councils  were  so  chosen  that  they  felt  small  responsi- 

9 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


bility  to  the  so-called  electorates,  and  in  general  one 
may  say  that  there  was  little  visible  increase  of  Indian 
control  over  the  conduct  of  public  affairs.  In  the 
Viceroy’s  Legislative  Council  the  Government  block 
made  up  of  nominated  members  could  always  vote 
down  the  Indian  opposition,  though  in  Provincial 
Councils  Indian  members  could  create  a  deadlock  by 
refusing  to  vote  for  measures  without  which  Govern¬ 
ment  could  not  carry  on.  In  a  word,  Indians  en¬ 
joyed  only  negative  powers.  Yet  that  is  not  quite 
true,  for  Government  often  yielded  to  Indian  wishes 
in  private  conferences  rather  than  in  the  public  dis¬ 
cussion.  In  this  way  Government  deprived  the  re¬ 
forms  of  credit  fairly  earned,  and  the  Indian  public 
remained  in  ignorance  of  the  real  extent  to  which 
Indian  representatives  made  themselves  felt.  As  a 
result  the  tide  of  discontent  rose,  and  even  moderate 
Indians  came  to  regard  the  reforms  as  illusory.  In¬ 
deed,  an  impartial  observer  would  say  that  while  very 
great  scope  had  been  given  for  Indian  opinion  to 
affect  Government,  there  had  been  granted  little 
real  power.  Indians  developed  their  critical  at  the 
expense  of  their  constructive  faculties.  They  were 
not  forced  to  devise  means  to  gain  the  ends  for  which 


io 


THE  INDIAN  PROBLEM 


they  hoped,  and  their  sense  of  public  responsibility 
could  not  grow. 

Meanwhile  there  had  been  developing  an  organi¬ 
zation  of  the  forces  of  discontent  in  India,  destined 
to  become  very  formidable  to  the  British  regime. 
The  formation  of  the  Indian  National  Congress,  as 
long  ago  as  1885,  and  its  evolution  from  a  fairly 
conservative  organization — led  at  times  by  men  who 
are  to-day  the  chief  supporters  of  the  Government — 
to  a  body  now  wholly  in  the  hands  of  extremists  is 
a  story  in  itself.  Its  growth  and  the  processes  of 
education  by  which  the  British  Government  care¬ 
fully  trained  the  body  of  Indian  agitators  which  seeks 
to  overthrow  it,  is  not  within  the  scope  of  this  work. 
I  have  read  of  it  in  books,  I  have  heard  it  from  the 
suave  lips  of  the  sweet-spoken  Pundit  Malaviya, 
President  of  Benares  Hindu  University,  one  of  the 
three  or  four  greatest  Indian  leaders.  He  and 
Sastri,  perhaps,  have  the  best  brains  of  them  all. 
This  man,  medium-sized,  well-knit,  with  a  mind 
quick,  keen  and  tireless,  argues  with  intense  convic¬ 
tion.  If  he  talks,  as  he  did  to  me,  for  over  two  hours, 
you  realize  at  the  close  that  he  had  organized  perfectly 
from  the  first  all  that  he  meant  to  say.  At  that  time 


11 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


he  agreed  with  Gandhi  as  to  the  end  to  be  attained, 
but  he  differed  as  to  non-cooperation  because  he  be¬ 
lieved  it  would  not  succeed.  If  he  thought  it  would 
bring  the  British  to  terms,  he  would  have  gone  in 
with  all  his  heart.  One  of  his  firm  convictions  was 
that  business  interests  controlled  the  government  of 
India.  He  believed  that  the  Viceroy  was  a  good 
man  who  meant  well,  but  that  the  government 
machine  shackled  him,  and  rendered  him  unable  to 
do  as  his  natural  goodness  would  dictate.  He  is  sane 
enough  to  keep  out  of  jail,  though  a  minister  of  state 
at  Delhi  assured  me  that  the  Pundit  was  a  very  viper 
in  his  hate  of  the  English,  and  that  for  twenty  years 
he  had  been  at  the  “bottom  of  all  political  deviltry  in 
India,  but  concealed  his  part  under  a  cultivated  ex¬ 
terior.”  Malaviya,  I  should  add,  asserted  solemnly 
to  me  that  he  did  not  hate  the  English,  that  he  would 
“be  ashamed  to  hate  any  human  being.”  Though 
Malaviya  did  not  wholly  agree  with  Gandhi,  espe¬ 
cially  in  the  latter’s  plan  to  get  Indian  students  to 
stay  away  from  government  colleges,  including  the 
one  of  which  Malaviya  was  president,  yet  the  two 
remained  on  good  terms,  and  when  Gandhi’s  im¬ 
prisonment  took  him  from  the  leadership  of  the  Non¬ 
cooperators,  Malaviya  succeeded  him,  as  far  as  it  was 


12 


THE  INDIAN  PROBLEM 


possible  for  so  unique  a  personality  to  have  a  suc¬ 
cessor. 

Though  we  must  omit  the  story  of  the  rise  of  the 
Indian  National  Congress,  the  outline  at  least  of  the 
history  of  the  embryonic  stages  of  the  Government 
of  India  Act  deserves  attention. 

When  India  remained  loyal  in  the  midst  of  the 
Great  War,  the  idea  took  possession  of  the  minds 
of  a  group  of  generous  Englishmen  that  the  only 
adequate  reward  was  to  satisfy  Indian  political 
aspirations  to  the  utmost  limit  compatible  with  In¬ 
dian  welfare  and  the  safety  of  the  British  Empire. 
Government,  both  in  India  and  in  England,  was 
under  too  great  a  strain  to  give  proper  considera¬ 
tion  to  so  great  a  problem,  and  it  was  a  small  group 
of  individuals,  sometimes  vaguely  described  as  the 
“Round  Table  group,”  which  undertook  the  initial 
discussions.  At  Shillong,  high  up  in  the  Khasi  Hills, 
the  fascinating  story  of  the  early  stages  of  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  of  India  Act  was  told  me  at  the  fireside  in 
the  study  of  Sir  William  Marris,  Governor  of  Assam. 
Later  in  Williamstown,  I  heard  the  story  from  the 
lips  of  Lionel  Curtis,  who  left  with  me  the  impres¬ 
sion  that  I  had  been  privileged  to  listen  to  the  words 
of  a  prophet. 


13 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


It  is  an  engaging  story,  these  splendid  enthusiasts, 
first  getting  inspiration  during  a  walk  in  the  glorious 
mountains  of  the  Canadian  Pacific  slope,  and  then 
in  a  London  Round  Table  group  searching  for  a 
promising  basis  of  reform  in  the  Government  of 
India.  It  was  there  that  the  “dyarchy”  idea  was  at 
first  rejected,  and  then  taken  up  again  to  become  the 
head  of  the  corner.  After  the  Round  Table  had 
threshed  the  matter  out,  Lionel  Curtis  made  his  mo¬ 
mentous  visits  to  India,  wrote  his  famous  “Letter  to 
the  People  of  India,”  and  when  he  and  Sir  Valentine 
Chirol  and  Sir  William  Duke  and  Sir  William  Marris 
had  worked  out  a  plan,  they  gave  it  to  the  Viceroy, 
Lord  Chelmsford.  His  Council  rejected  it,  and 
produced  another  plan,  which  only  caused  delay  and 
was  ultimately  given  up.  The  old  plan  was  then  sent 
to  London,  and  Mr.  Montagu,  Secretary  of  State, 
undertook  the  mission  to  India  which  produced  the 
Montagu-Chelmsford  report  and  ultimately  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  of  India  Act  of  1919. 

Mr.  Montagu,  who  had  so  much  to  do  with  that 
act,  interests  one  greatly.  I  have  seen  a  great  deal  of 
his  correspondence  with  Englishmen  in  India.  He 
was  almost  as  much  of  an  idealist  as  Gandhi,  and 
would  throw  aside  whole  volumes  of  indisputable 

14 


THE  INDIAN  PROBLEM 


facts,  if  they  did  not  fall  in  with  his  theories  and 
principles.  He  was  perhaps  too  sensitive  to  Indian 
opinion,  and  rarely  stopped  to  sift  the  grain  from  the 
chaff  in  the  letters,  speeches,  newspapers  which 
poured  in  upon  him.  Moreover,  with  all  his  in¬ 
tuitive  understanding  of  the  Indian  spirit,  he  was 
apt  as  Secretary  of  State  to  lose  sight  of  the  pri¬ 
mary  duty  of  governing.  He  was  “always  sympa¬ 
thetic,  almost  never  firm.”  His  overthrow,  March 
1922,  was  a  sad  blow  to  Indian  faith,  for  the 
Indian  leaders  jumped  to  the  conclusion  that  the 
“reactionaries”  were  once  more  in  the  saddle  and 
would  call  a  halt  to  Indian  progress.  The  Viceroy 
missed  him,  too,  for  with  the  new  Secretary,  Lord 
Peel,  the  personal  touch  was  lacking,  and  Lord  Read¬ 
ing  is  a  lonely  man  with  few  to  consult  as  man  to 
man.  It  was  a  great  relief  to  him  to  discuss  with  Mr. 
Montagu  in  his  letters  everything  that  he  could  not 
thresh  out  with  his  colleagues  in  India.  The  new 
Secretary  of  State  has  not  changed  Montagu's  policy 
in  any  tangible  way,  but  Indians  are  suspicious,  and 
cannot  believe  that  their  affairs  will  continue  to  be 
handled  with  the  same  sympathy  as  during  Montagu's 
regime. 


II 


THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  INDIA  ACT; 

ITS  CRITICS  AND  ITS  DEFENDERS 

Besides  reading  the  Montagu-Chelmsford  report, 
the  Government  of  India  Act,  and  several  Govern¬ 
ment  documents  connected  therewith,  I  heard  the 
essentials  of  the  act  carefully  discussed  by  His  Excel¬ 
lency,  Sir  George  Lloyd,  Governor  of  Bombay, 
sitting  with  legs  curled  up  in  an  easy-chair,  and  his 
head  thrown  hard  back  as  if  to  relieve  a  nerve-strain. 
There  in  his  office,  whose  windows  looked  out  over 
the  Arabian  Sea,  he  told  me  with  perfect  frankness 
his  Tory  political  background,  his  original  lack  of 
sympathy  with  the  aims  of  the  Government  of  India 
Act,  and  his  present  perfect  loyalty  to  its  purposes. 

This  slight  man,  of  medium  height,  with  thin, 
keen,  alert  face,  black  hair,  brown  eyes  with  lids 
almost  closed  as  he  talks  earnestly,  and  whose  voice 
grows  thin  and  falsetto  as  he  becomes  earnest,  is  a 
most  interesting  ruler  of  men.  His  mind  is  alert, 
incisive,  positive.  He  graces  his  speech  with  apt 

1 6 


THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  INDIA  ACT 


literary  quotations.  Indeed  he  has  the  face  and  deli¬ 
cate  emotions  of  a  poet,  but  the  clear,  decisive  action 
of  a  ruler — as  he  is,  of  22,000,000  people,  and  the 
protector  of  20,000,000  more.  He  is  always  cour¬ 
teous,  but  unyielding;  “a  definite,  determined  little 
fighter,”  as  a  friend  said  of  him.  With  a  slight 
drawl  that  hastens  on  to  a  rapid-fire  utterance  as  he 
grows  intense,  he  soon  convinces  you  that  he  feels 
what  he  says.  You  would  take  his  word  if  a  king¬ 
dom  were  at  stake,  but  you  would  admit  that  he  might 
see  clearly  only  one  side.  He  handled  very  ably  one 
of  the  most  difficult  situations  in  India  during  1921- 
1922,  and  I  have  every  reason  to  believe  that  he  and 
Lord  Willingdon,  Governor  of  the  Madras  Presi¬ 
dency,  were  the  determining  forces  that  led  to  the 
final  arrest  of  Mr.  Gandhi.  For  his  seizure,  indeed, 
Sir  George  takes  full  responsibility.  Neither  had 
liked  the  policy  of  drift  and  “watchful  waiting.” 

Sir  George  discussed  the  Government  of  India  Act 
with  sympathy  and  clear  vision  as  to  its  possibilities 
and  its  dangers.  Later  I  discussed  it  with  other 
governors  and  ministers  and  councilors,  and  with 
many  Indians,  Nationalists  or  followers  of  Gandhi. 
In  that  Act  the  British  Parliament  tried  to  provide 
the  Indian  people  with  legislative  machinery  that 

17 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


would  enable  them  at  once  greatly  to  influence,  if  not 
wholly  to  control,  their  own  government,  and  led 
them  to  expect  from  time  to  time  further  grants  of 
power  leading  ultimately  to  full  self-government.  It 
was  made  plain  to  the  Indians  that,  if  they  should  ' 
prove  faithful  over  a  few  things,  they  might  ulth 
mately  be  made  rulers  over  many  things. 

The  Act  provided  that  in  the  Government  of  India 
at  Delhi,  the  new  capital,  the  Viceroy’s  Executive 
Council  was  hereafter  to  have  three  Indian  members 
out  of  a  total  of  eight;  and  in  the  Secretary  of  State’s 
Council,  in  Whitehall,  there  were  to  be  three  Indian 
members.  A  Legislative  Assembly  in  Delhi  was  to 
have  a  large  majority  of  its  members  freely  elected 
by  Indian  constituencies  having  as  broad  a  franchise 
as  conditions  permitted.  An  upper  house,  the  Coun¬ 
cil  of  State,  was  also  to  have  a  good  majority  of 
Indian  members,  some  elected,  some  nominated,  a 
few  ex  officio.  The  Government  of  India  was  not, 
it  is  true,  to  be  responsible  to  these  Indian-dominated 
legislative  bodies,  but  to  the  Secretary  of  State  in 
London,  and  through  him  to  Parliament,  itself 
responsible,  of  course,  to  the  British  electorate. 
Nevertheless,  though  the  Governor-General  in  Coun¬ 
cil  cannot  be  overthrown  by  an  adverse  vote,  and 

18 


THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  INDIA  ACT 


though  he  may  override  his  legislature,  “certifying” 
that  items  which  it  may  have  refused  are  essential  to 
the  welfare  of  India,  the  fact  remains  that  this  power 
has  been  exercised  only  three  times.  The  men  who 
govern  India  do  not  wish  to  run  the  risk  of  wreck¬ 
ing  the  new  scheme  by  creating  a  direct  conflict 
between  the  Assembly  and  the  Government. 

More  important,  perhaps,  are  the  provisions  as  to 
the  provincial  governments  under  the  Government  of 
India  Act.  The  Act  provides  for  a  “devolution” 
of  powers  formerly  the  attributes  of  the  provincial 
Governor  in  Council.  In  Bengal,  Bombay,  Madras, 
and  five  other  divisions  of  British  India,  Indian 
ministers,  acting  with  the  Governor,  acquire  control 
of  certain  matters,  subject  only  to  the  approval  of  a 
Legislative  Council  wherein  there  is  a  large  Indian 
non-official  majority.  These  subjects — education, 
sanitation,  public  works — are  called  “transferred  sub¬ 
jects”  as  against  the  “reserved  subjects”  concerned 
with  peace,  order,  and  good  government  which  are 
still  vested,  as  of  old,  in  the  Governor,  now  assisted 
by  one  Indian  and  one  British  member  of  Council. 
This  curious  device,  the  last  resort  of  ingenious  minds 
driven  to  desperation  by  a  baffling  problem,  is  called 
“dyarchy.”  Sir  William  Marris,  who  has  one  of  the 

19 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


ablest  and  most  interesting  minds  in  India,  admitted 
to  me  that  it  was  an  effort  to  poise  government,  like 
Mahomet’s  coffin,  between  heaven  and  earth. 
“Dyarchy,”  he  said,  “rests  on  the  assumption  that 
some  departments  are  more  concerned  with  essentials 
than  others.  I  believe  there  is  more  error  than  truth 
in  that  assumption.”  He  had  proposed  departments 
which  would  be  placed  under  one  councilor  (an 
Englishman),  and  one  minister  (an  Indian);  the 
councilor  to  interfere,  as  does  the  British  resident  in 
a  native  state,  only  in  case  of  absolute  necessity. 

Finally,  the  makers  of  the  Act  tried  to  change  the 
eternal  laws  of  political  science  and  to  divide 
sovereignty,  which  after  all  was  no  greater  task  than 
was  attempted  by  the  makers  of  the  Federal  Consti¬ 
tution  in  the  Philadelphia  Convention  in  1787.  This 
division  of  sovereignty  includes  both  the  arrange¬ 
ments  which  seems  to  make  Government  responsi¬ 
ble  to  the  Indian  people,  when  it  is  actually  responsible 
to  the  British  electorate  ultimately,  and  the  division 
of  the  functions  of  provincial  government  into  re¬ 
served  and  transferred  subjects.  One  other  pecul¬ 
iarity,  almost  incomprehensible  to  the  American 
mind  obsessed  by  the  idea  of  proportional  represen¬ 
tation,  is  the  plan  of  communal  representation  by 


20 


THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  INDIA  ACT 


which  certain  Indian  minorities,  the  Sikhs  in  the 
Punjab,  the  Par  sis  in  the  Bombay  presidency,  the 
non-Brahmans  in  the  province  of  Madras,  the 
Mohammedans  in  various  parts  of  India,  the  Euro¬ 
pean  business  interests  everywhere,  receive  a  repre¬ 
sentation  in  the  legislative  bodies  wholly  out  of  pro¬ 
portion  to  their  numbers.  In  a  word,  nervous  and 
clamorous  interests,  castes,  or  religious  sects  are 
given  representatives,  because  it  is  assumed  that  can¬ 
didates  known  to  belong  to  that  group,  caste,  or  sect, 
would  have  no  chance  of  being  elected  in  a  contest 
where  a  simple  majority  of  the  electorate  determines 
the  contest.  It  is  as  if  the  Baptists  and  Methodists 
of  an  American  congressional  district,  and  the  repre¬ 
sentatives  of  the  automobile  industry,  regardless  of 
their  proportionate  numbers  in  the  whole  body  of 
citizens,  should  be  entitled  to  elect  some  one  of  their 
number  to  go  and  represent  their  interests  in  the 
national  government.  The  arrangement  is  only  one 
of  the  many  evidences  of  the  great  part  that  religion 
plays  in  Indian  politics.  There  has  not  developed  in 
India  that  sense  of  common  citizenship  which  terri¬ 
torial  electorates  assume  to  exist. 

And  one  who  imagines  that  India  is  ready  for  our 
democratic  ideas  of  rule  by  a  majority  should  read 


21 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


the  addresses  presented  to  the  Montagu  Commission 
by  the  farmers  of  the  Deccan,  by  the  zamindars  or 
great  landholders,  by  the  depressed  classes,  by  Euro¬ 
pean  business  men,  by  Mohammedans,  by  Indian 
Christians,  and  by  interests  of  various  kinds,  pleading 
that  in  the  new  representative  system  to  be  set  up  they 
should  not  be  left  at  the  mercy  of  any  mere  numerical 
majority.  It  is  as  if  the  Christian  Scientists,  the 
Scandinavians,  the  Jews,  the  tobacco-growers,  the 
Greek  shoeblacks  of  the  United  States  should  protest 
against  their  minority  interests  being  left  to  the  mercy 
of  a  majority  decision  in  the  American  Congress. 
It  is  these  facts,  and  many  others  strange  to  our 
western  world,  that  complicate  the  problem  of  giving 
self-government  to  the  myriad-minded  peoples  of 
India.  Editors  of  American  radical  journals  may 
sit  in  their  stuffy  studies,  stewing  in  their  owfi 
ignorance,  and  telling  England  how  to  rule  India,  but 
there  are  conditions  and  complications  their  philos¬ 
ophy  never  dreamed  of. 

Those  who  devised  the  Government  of  India  Act 
frankly  say  that  their  purpose  was  to  give  the  Indians 
experience  in  self-government  while  providing, 
during  the  immediate  future,  against  any  foolish  or 
inconsidered  action  injurious  to  Indian  or  to  British 


22 


THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  INDIA  ACT 


interests.  The  doctrine  of  letting  them  learn  by 
suffering  was  seriously  considered  at  one  time,  but 
then  abandoned.  It  would  be  leaving  to  their  own 
devices  those  who  feel  the  shoe  pinch,  but  least  know 
how  to  ease  it,  said  the  opponents.  The  answer  was, 
“Indians  may  not  do  things  well  at  first,  but  they 
can  learn  only  by  trying.  They  will  find  out  how  to 
do  things  well  by  suffering  the  discomforts  caused  by 
doing  them  badly.” 

At  one  stage  the  idea  of  extending  the  states  of 
native  princes,  and  turning  the  rule  of  British  India 
over  to  them  was  considered;  but  Indian  protest 
was  as  bitter  then  as  it  was  recently  when  a  desperate 
British  publicist,  Sir  Frederick  Lugard,  suggested 
that  solution  of  the  Indian  problem.  Sir  Frederick 
had  written :  “Wherever  it  is  possible  to  extend  the 
boundaries  of  a  loyal  and  well-ordered  Native  State, 
let  it  be  extended  to  embrace  an  area  as  large  as  it  can 
assimilate.  Where  it  is  possible  to  reinstate  a  native 
dynasty  with  such  varying  and  temporary  safeguards 
as  the  experience  of  the  Indian  Government  may  con¬ 
sider  necessary,  let  the  native  ruler  be  once  again 
created  the  titular  head  of  his  State.  Where,  on  the 
other  hand,  as  perhaps  in  the  greater  part  of  Bengal, 
the  character  of  the  people,  or  the  absence  of  any  rep- 

23 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


resentative  of  an  ancient  dynasty,  or  the  existence  of 
a  considerable  proportion  of  the  educated  and  politi¬ 
cally  minded  class,  renders  this  policy  impracticable, 
let  the  present  system  of  elected  representatives  be 
carried  forward  with  every  possible  encouragement.” 
By  such  a  policy,  he  added,  “we  should  rivet  the  bonds 
of  friendship  with  the  Native  States  and  go  far  to 
unify  India  as  a  single  entity  to  take  her  place  as  an 
independent  unit  of  the  British  Empire.”  But  Indian 
protest  against  all  such  plans  was  instant  and 
resonant.  Something  similar  had  already  been 
suggested  by  Sir  H.  Cotton,  who  proposed  for  India : 
“An  organization  of  small  states  each  with  a  prince 
at  its  head  and  a  small  body  of  patrician  aristocracy 
interposing  between  him  and  the  lower  orders  of 
working  men.”  Then  the  United  States  of  India 
might  be  bound  together  by  a  Council  of  Nobles,  a 
patriciate  “accustomed  by  hereditary  associations  to 
control  and  lead.”  But  responsible  Indians  would 
have  none  of  it. 

Indeed,  the  governor  of  a  great  province  told  me 
that  in  many  cases  where  Indian  princes  had  claimed 
territory  of  British  India  which  formed  an  enclave 
in  their  dominions,  he  had  offered  to  yield  the 
claim  if,  by  plebiscite,  the  people  dwelling  there  would 

24 


THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  INDIA  ACT 


express  a  desire  to  become  subjects  of  the  prince. 
In  every  case  the  people  voted  against  a  transfer  of 
their  allegiance.  Indeed,  T.  V.  Seshagiri  Ayer 
admits  that  if  a  choice  were  offered  to  the  people 
of  a  taluk  or  of  a  village  in  an  Indian  state  to  ex¬ 
change  their  allegiance,  in  most  cases  they  would 
cheerfully  accept  the  British  sway,  and,  he  adds, 
“Indians  of  native  states  often  migrate  to  British 
India,”  but,  he  concludes,  “It  should  not  be  so. 
Patriotic  Indians  ought  to  prefer  Princes” !  It  was 
admitted  during  the  discussion  of  the  new  plan  of 
government  that,  under  the  native  princes,  Govern¬ 
ment  was  less  efficient  than  under  the  British  rule; 
but  the  reply  was  that,  under  the  latter  regime,  “law 
and  order  was  almost  too  perfect  for  India ;  the  high 
standard  of  public  life  almost  too  good  for  it.” 

Finally,  however,  the  present  scheme,  with  all  its 
imperfections  on  its  head,  was  put  through  all  the 
perils  of  a  parliamentary  debate,  and,  with  a  pro¬ 
vision  for  progressive  revision  from  time  to  time, 
was  made  a  law.  In  February  of  1921,  the  Duke 
of  Connaught  inaugurated,  at  Delhi,  the  new  Legis¬ 
lative  Assembly — “worthy  daughter  of  the  Mother 
of  all  Parliaments,”  as  a  proud  Indian  orator  chris¬ 
tened  it.  There  was  a  strong  effort  by  the  Extre- 

25 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


mists,  the  “Non-cooperators,”  to  make  a  farce  of  the 
Government  of  India  Act  by  getting  the  Indian 
electors  to  stay  away  from  the  polls.  It  was  urged 
that  nothing  had  been  given  that  was  worth  while, 
that  it  was  a  hateful  thing,  not  to  be  touched. 
Dyarchy,  the  opponents  said,  was  merely  bureaucracy 
painted  white.  In  Delhi  the  Non-cooperators  tried  to 
make  a  farce  of  the  election  by  putting  up  as  a  can¬ 
didate  a  sweetmeat  dealer,  a  familiar  figure  in  the 
Chandni  Chauk,  the  main  street  of  Delhi.  He  was 
elected  and  the  N.  C.  O.’s,  as  they  are  called  for  short 
in  India,  thought  that  when  the  members  of  the 
assembly  gathered  to  take  the  oath  of  office,  their 
dummy  delegate  would  rise,  refuse  to  take  the  oath, 
and  make  an  insulting  speech  to  the  Government 
benches.  Once  the  sweetmeat  dealer  was  actually 
elected,  however,  he  rather  enjoyed  his  distinction, 
took  the  oath  of  office,  and  became  one  of  the  most 
loyal  supporters  of  government. 

Throughout  India  the  Non-cooperators  were  only 
partially  successful  in  keeping  voters  away,  and  not  at 
all  so  in  preventing  a  very  respectable  body  of  repre¬ 
sentatives  from  being  elected  to  the  provincial  coun¬ 
cils,  and  to  the  Legislative  Assembly  and  Council  of 
State  at  Delhi.  Their  main  accomplishment  was  the 

26 


THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  INDIA  ACT 


prevention  of  a  complete  trial  of  the  new  plan,  because 
the  members  are  chiefly  moderates,  the  Gandhi  radi¬ 
cals  having  stayed  out.  They  might  greatly  have  in¬ 
creased  the  troubles  of  Government. 

After  attending  a  number  of  sessions  of  the  coun¬ 
cils  in  the  United  Provinces,  and  in  Bengal,  and 
spending  about  ten  days  with  the  Legislative  Assem¬ 
bly  in  Delhi,  and  being  privileged,  moreover,  to  talk 
with  governors  and  councilors  about  the  actual  work¬ 
ing  of  “dyarchy,”  I  became  convinced,  in  spite  of  the 
worst  that  Indian  critics  had  to  say  about  the  new 
constitution,  that  every  effort  is  being  made  by  the 
British  Government  to  carry  out  the  Government  of 
India  Act  according  to  the  spirit  of  its  best  wishers. 
“Dyarchy”  had,  in  fact,  become,  in  most  cases  a 
unitary  government  in  which  the  Governor  sat  in 
Council  with  all  of  his  ministers,  those  responsible 
for  the  “transferred”  subjects  as  well  as  those  con¬ 
cerned  with  the  “reserved.”  In  the  main,  Govern¬ 
ment’s  action  was  determined  by  the  views  of  the 
majority.  Though  the  Governor  might  “certify” 
items  in  the  budget  and  insist  upon  his  views  pre¬ 
vailing,  he  had  in  most  cases  refused  to  place  himself 
in  opposition  to  the  will  of  his  Council. 

Lord  Ronaldshay,  Governor  of  Bengal,  managed 

27 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


with  great  adroitness  a  situation  which  developed 
over  a  bill  concerning  the  salaries  of  the  Calcutta 
police.  Though  seemingly  almost  compelled  to  “cer¬ 
tify”  the  bill  and  go  ahead,  he  induced  the  Legislative 
Council  to  pass  the  once  negatived  bill  after  he,  with 
great  tact,  gave  them  a  way  to  save  their  faces.  Had 
they  not  done  so,  he  indicated  clearly  what  his  action 
would  have  been,  when  he  said  that  he  would  feel 
“justified  in  demanding  release  from  responsibilities 
which  he  was  no  longer  able  satisfactorily  to  dis¬ 
charge.”  In  a  word,  that  if  a  governor  could  not 
get  along  with  his  council,  he  must  go.  This  Lord 
Ronaldshay  was  not  obliged  to  do  under  the  Govern¬ 
ment  of  India  Act,  but  he  would  make  the  constitu¬ 
tional  precedent.  His  whole  regime  in  Bengal  was 
a  masterly  exhibition  of  statesmanship. 

Agitators  complained  to  me  that  when  Indians 
became  ministers  they  went  over  body  and  soul  to 
Government;  but  ministers  themselves  assured  me 
that  when  they  became  responsible  they  saw  things 
in  a  very  different  light  from  when  they  stood  out¬ 
side  and  were  in  opposition  to  Government.  Lajpat 
Rai  has  declared  that  the  British  Government  had 
purchased  the  support  of  every  moderate  leader  in 
India.  This  accusation  against  the  men  of  his  own 

28 


THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  INDIA  ACT 


country  is  damning  to  India.  A  country  with  so 
many  of  its  intellectuals  ready  to  sell  themselves  is 
surely  not  ready  for  self-government.  Vilification 
of  brother  Indians  will  not  help  the  “Non-coopera¬ 
tion”  cause.  Agitators  complained  also  that  Govern¬ 
ment  knew  how,  by  showing  social  favors  and  by 
granting  flattering  titles,  to  win  over  even  elected 
Indians  to  do  its  will;  but  when  I  suggested,  in  a 
meeting  of  some  twenty  “nationalists,”  that  they  get 
the  Council  to  pass  a  resolution  forbidding  Indians 
to  accept  titles,  they  protested  that  such  a  resolution 
would  not  pass  because  so  many  hoped  to  get  titles. 
All  I  could  answer  to  that  was  that  they  must  pray  for 
Roman  virtues. 

Indian  critics  of  the  Government  of  India  Act 
also  point  out  that  the  ministers  with  the  reserved 
powers,  the  Indian  ministers,  can  get  money  to 
develop  their  departments  of  Government  only  by 
asking  for  more  taxes,  and  that  that  will  make  them 
unpopular.  Moreover,  they  cannot  reduce  the 
amount  spent  on  other  branches  of  Government  and 
thus  save  for  their  subjects,  education,  sanitation, 
and  public  works.  Critics  say  also  that  the  ministers 
suffer  by  comparison  with  the  part  of  the  Government 
carried  on  under  the  reserved  powers.  The  Depart- 

29 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


ment  of  reserved  power,  being  a  rival  of  the  Depart¬ 
ment  of  transferred  power,  will,  the  Indians  say, 
develop  into  an  opposition  camp,  thus  handicapping 
the  less  experienced  ministers  of  transferred  De¬ 
partments. 

Critics  say  also  that  if  a  governor  and  his  English 
ministers  are  actually  not  in  sympathy  with  the  idea 
of  India’s  getting  self-government  they  will  not  give 
sympathetic  help  to  those  responsible  for  the  trans¬ 
ferred  powers.  If  the  Governor  with  police  power 
refuses  to  be  really  helpful  to  the  minister  with  the 
transferred  powers  in  matters  of  sanitation,  little 
can  be  done.  The  same  is  true,  they  say,  of  the 
members  of  the  Civil  Service,  appointed  and  paid 
by  the  British  part  of  the  regime,  for  they  might 
refuse  to  be  helpful  to  the  minister  of  transferred 
powers.  On  the  other  hand,  British  critics  say  that 
although  the  Government  of  India  Act  deliberately 
gave  the  Viceroy  and  Provincial  Governors  such 
powers  as  would  support  their  responsibilities,  Indian 
politicians,  even  of  the  moderate  sort,  are  forcibly 
shifting  the  gears  in  order  to  get  the  control  of  even 
the  “reserved”  powers  into  their  own  hands,  that 
they  may  dictate  a  policy  where  they  have  no  respon¬ 
sibility.  Every  time  a  British  executive  yields  in  the 

30 


THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  INDIA  ACT 


hope  of  conciliating,  he  discovers  that  the  Indian 
Oliver  Twists  are  only  asking  for  more.  Indian  legis¬ 
lators,  cringing  in  fear  of  extremist  pressure,  dare 
not  stop  with  one  accomplishment,  but  drive  anew  a 
further  claim. 

There  is  no  question  that  a  large  part  of  the 
Indian  political  world  frets  against  the  Act’s  “multi¬ 
tudinous  safeguards,  checks  and  counterchecks”  as 
not  affording  free  scope  to  Indian  political  talent,  but 
many  are  aware  also  that  the  Act  gives  them  a 
machinery  which,  properly  handled,  will  make  them 
irresistible.  Indeed,  many  well-disposed  Englishmen 
fear  this,  and  rail  against  the  folly  of  a  scheme  which 
has  hitched  them  to  a  comet.  As  for  “skipping 
dyarchy”  which  some  provincial  governments  have 
tended  to  do,  the  critics  plead:  “Run  the  Govern¬ 
ment  on  the  rails  the  Constitution  has  furnished ;  any 
other  path  leads  to  disaster.” 

It  seems  to  me,  at  least,  that  any  fair  student  of 
the  results  of  two  years’  use  of  the  new  constitutional 
reforms  must  come  to  the  conclusion  that  there  are 
now  definite  checks  on  serious  misgovernment  and 
upon  absolutism,  and  that  the  Indian  leaders  are 
really  getting  a  training  in  self-government,  which 

31 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


they  will  continue  to  do  if  good  will  abides  between 
them  and  British  officials. 

The  opposition  argues  that  Indians  have  gained 
only  negative  power ;  but  as  I  read  the  Government  of 
India  Act,  I  would  ask  nothing  better,  if  I  were  an 
Indian,  than  to  seize  the  opportunity  there  offered 
to  bring  Government  to  a  standstill  when  it  asks 
for  new  taxes.  The  British  at  least  have  the  grace 
to  be  sensitive  to  the  world’s  opinion,  and  I  doubt 
if  any  British  minister,  in  order  to  meet  such  a  situa¬ 
tion,  would  repeal  the  Government  of  India  Act  and 
go  back  to  the  old  methods  of  absolutism.  He 
would  be  far  more  likely  to  grant  concession  to  Indian 
demands  and  ask  in  return  Indian  votes  which  would 
set  Government  in  motion  again. 

Moreover,  the  mere  passage  of  the  Government  of 
India  Act  has  wrought  a  change  in  the  attitude  of 
Government,  provincial  and  general.  No  longer 
being  able  to  rely  upon  the  “wicked  old  system”  of 
the  “official  block” — which  arrogantly  carried  all 
Government  measures  over  opposition — Government 
has  become  more  careful  of  expenditures.  Under  the 
old  conditions,  with  the  best  intentions  in  the  world, 
if  Government  thought  anything  ought  to  be  done, 

32 


THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  INDIA  ACT 


it  went  ahead;  but  now  it  takes  thought  of  the 
criticism  of  a  jealous  council  or  assembly. 

The  Government  of  India  Act  can  be  interpreted  in 
two  ways,  depending  wholly  upon  the  interpreter’s 
confidence  in  the  good  faith  of  its  makers  and  in  the 
generosity  of  the  British  administrators.  The  cynic 
will  say  that  it  is  a  diabolical  thing,  contrived  with 
Machiavellian  ingenuity  to  appear  to  give  Indians 
self-government  when  in  fact  it  does  not.  The 
charitable  commentator  will  on  the  other  hand  declare 
that  given  the  actual  conditions  in  India,  the  British 
went  to  the  utmost  limit  in  entrusting  power  to  the 
Indians,  and  merely  protected  themselves  and  the 
Indians  against  ruinous  political  folly.  He  will  add 
that  the  actual  administrators  of  it  are  honest,  well- 
meaning  men. 

When  one  talks  of  introducing  into  India  demo¬ 
cratic  government,  a  political  system  which  requires 
some  way  of  learning  what  may  be  the  will  of  the 
majority,  one  must  bear  in  mind  certain  fundamental 
conditions.  Of  the  three  hundred  twenty  millions, 
not  over  four  millions  can  both  read  and  write  any 
language.  Two  millions,  perhaps,  of  these  can  read 
and  write  English.  It  is  in  this  latter  group  that 
one  finds  the  divine  discontent.  Most  of  the  rest 


33 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


are  stirred  to  it  by  agitation,  part  of  which  is 
produced  by  honest  means,  part  by  methods  which 
will  not  bear  the  light.  One  must  think  of 
ninety  or  even  ninety-five  per  cent  of  the  Indian 
people  as  dwelling,  in  groups  of  three  or  four  hun¬ 
dred,  in  the  seven  hundred  thirty  thousand  villages 
of  India.  The  lives  of  these  “silent  millions” 
are  simple  and  untutored  beyond  the  conception 
of  those  who  have  only  seen  the  most  advanced 
peoples  of  the  West.  They  dwell  for  the  most 
part  in  mud  huts  with  thatched  roofs,  in  which 
there  is  little  or  no  furniture,  no  chairs,  no 
tables,  no  beds.  The  average  yearly  budget  for  the 
prosperous  peasant  with  a  family  of  five  in  Bengal, 
for  example,  is  about  $76  in  American  money.  The 
family  eats  squatting  about  an  earthen  pot  containing 
the  paddy  or  rice,  their  staple  food.  They  help  them¬ 
selves  to  food  with  their  fingers.  When  they  sleep 
they  roll  up  in  a  blanket  on  the  floor.  The  interior 
of  each  of  these  mud  huts  is  scrubbed  daily  with  dried 
cow  dung.  The  living  for  a  family  of  five  is  got 
from  a  piece  of  land  perhaps  an  acre  in  extent.  The 
greatest  excitement  that  comes  into  their  lives  is  a 
wedding  or  a  funeral.  There  is  little  social  life  aside 
from  that.  Except  when  these  people  take  religious 

34 


THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  INDIA  ACT 


pilgrimages  to  Benares,  or  some  other  sacred  spot, 
there  is  little  communication.  There  are  no  village 
newspapers  to  bring  news  of  the  outside  world  nor 
to  tell  them  of  what  neighboring  villages  are  doing 
or  thinking.  Their  interests  are  local  and  they  have 
no  means  of  uniting  for  common  action  with  other 
villages.  It  is  these  people  to  whom  well-meaning 
enthusiasts  wish  to  give  at  once  without  delay,  com¬ 
plete  control  of  the  government  of  a  country  con¬ 
taining  one-fifth  of  the  human  race!  If  it  were 
possible  to  set  off  by  themselves  the  four  million  more 
or  less  educated  Indians,  I  have  no  doubt  that  they 
would  be  able  to  rule  themselves  fairly  successfully, 
by  a  democratic  scheme  of  government,  but  left  to 
look  out  for  the  safety,  health,  protection  and  pros¬ 
perity  of  hundreds  of  millions  of  fellow  Indians  in 
their  villages,  I  wonder  not  merely  whether  they  could 
do  it  as  well  as  the  British,  but  whether  such  a  regime 
could  end  in  anything  but  anarchy,  and  primeval 
confusion.  Certainly  so  great  is  the  doubt  that 
those  who  are  transferring  power  to  them  have  every 
warrant  for  going  forward  with  caution. 


Ill 


THE  INDIAN  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY 

To  an  American,  an  Indian  legislative  body  is  very 
entertaining,  and  the  most  picturesque  parliament 
in  the  world.  In  the  Legislative  Assembly  at  Delhi 
it  was  disappointing  to  find  not  over  one-third  of  the 
members  present.  It  was  overrun  with  absentees, 
to  use  an  Hibernian  phrase.  Some  had  offered  a 
resolution  against  Government  and  then  became 
alarmed ;  some  did  not  wish  to  commit  themselves  on 
a  vote  that  would  make  them  unpopular ;  some  refused 
to  sacrifice  private  business  to  public  interests;  and 
others,  I  was  told,  were  disgusted  with  the  whole 
affair  and  thought  it  not  worth  the  candle. 

I  first  noted  the  superficial  aspects.  Dark  Indian 
faces  greatly  predominated;  some  black  with  white 
mustaches,  some  black  with  white  beards,  others 
just  plain.  There  were  eight  white  turbans,  one  gold 
embroidered,  one  red  fez,  two  black  ones,  and  one 
dark  red  and  gold.  One  had  a  gold  and  red  and  white 
scarf,  and  near  him  was  a  Hindu  with  a  large  V- 

36 


THE  INDIAN  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY 


shaped  caste  mark  on  his  forehead.  Circulating 
among  them  were  men  pages,  chaprassis,  whose  red 
robes  were  gold-trimmed  and  whose  turbans  were 
white  and  gold.  Most  prominent  on  the  Government 
benches  were  Sir  William  Vincent,  home  member, 
and  Mr.  Malcolm  Hailey,  finance  member.  With 
them  sat  Sarma  and  Sapru,  Indian  members  of  the 
Viceroy’s  Council. 

Presiding  over  them  all,  and  with  a  bemedaled, 
black-and-gold  liveried  sergeant  standing  behind  him, 
sat  Sir  Frederick  Whyte.  With  all  the  dignity  of  the 
Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons,  he  sat  in  black 
alpaca  robe,  trimmed  with  dark  red  silk,  a  white 
cravat  hanging  six  or  eight  inches  from  the  white 
collar.  A  gray  judge’s  wig  framed  Sir  Frederick’s 
strong,  handsome  face,  always  dignified,  but  on 
occasion  lighted  up  with  a  shrewd  smile  which  often 
preceded  a  dryly  humorous  comment  upon  his  ruling. 
Always  fair  and  just,  and  sure  of  his  House  of 
Commons  precedent,  his  rulings  are  accepted  with 
the  best  grace  possible  by  a  House  pleased  to  a  man 
with  the  admirable  equity,  mastery,  and  high  pur¬ 
pose  with  which  Sir  Frederick  has  guided  the  early 
faltering  steps  of  the  Assembly.  Rangachariar,  one 
of  the  most  notable  members,  said  of  him,  “He  main- 

37 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


tains  the  dignity  of  the  House  with  watchful  and 
unswerving  impartiality,  with  an  austerity  that  is 
not  oppressive,  and  an  accessibility  that  cannot  be 
presumed  upon.”  His  clear,  strong,  firm  voice,  and 
his  serene  mind,  always  cool  and  unperturbed,  compel 
confidence  in  his  decisions.  He  has  drilled  and  dis¬ 
ciplined  this  embryo  parliament  in  the  best  traditions 
of  the  House  of  Commons.  It  will  ever  be  indebted 
to  him  for  bending  the  twig  in  the  way  that  any 
parliamentary  tree  might  take  pride  in  being  inclined. 

A  brief  history  of  the  experience  of  the  new  Indian 
parliament,  which  meets  in  Delhi  during  the  winter 
but  at  other  times  in  Simla  in  the  Himalayan  foot¬ 
hills,  will  best  exhibit  its  strength  and  its  weakness. 
Partly  from  conversations  with  those  intimately 
active  in  its  work,  partly  from  confidential  reports 
placed  in  my  hands,  and  finally  by  reading  of  many 
debates  and  actual  listening  to  some,  I  have  gathered 
a  few  ideas  about  the  Indian  Legislative  Assembly 
which  may  help  to  reveal  its  nature. 

All  agree  that  the  first  result  of  the  new  order  of 
things  that  one  noticed  in  that  embryo  Parliament, 
fated  to  rule  in  due  course  one-fifth  of  the  human 
race,  was  that  a  new  sense  of  reality  pervaded  the 
proceedings.  This  was  due  to  the  disappearance  of 

38 


THE  INDIAN  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY 


the  old  official  block  and  the  presence  of  an  elected 
majority  of  Indians  in  the  Assembly.  A  critic  of 
Government  felt  that  his  arguments  must  carry 
weight  with  his  audience.  This  resulted  in  greater 
brevity,  pertinence  and  responsibility  of  most  of  the 
non-official  speeches.  Sir  Frederick  Whyte,  the 
President,  said  that  there  was  also  a  new  note  of 
persuasion  and  genuine  advocacy  in  the  arguments 
from  the  Government  bench. 

The  Delhi  session  (1921)  was  not  many  days  old 
before  members,  official  and  non-official,  began  to 
tell  Sir  Frederick,  their  president,  of  their  pleased 
surprise  at  finding  each  party  different  from  what 
the  other  had  expected.  In  the  eyes  of  the  Indian 
members  Government  was  more  human,  less  bureau¬ 
cratic  :  in  the  eyes  of  the  officials,  the  Assembly  as 
a  whole  was  more  reasonable  and  practical  than  either 
had  believed  possible.  Rangachariar,  one  of  the 
ablest  of  the  Madras  members,  said  on  the  floor: 
“Sir,  when  I  read  the  debates  in  this  Council  a  year 
before  over  the  Punjab  affair,  I  formed  a  very  bad 
opinion  of  the  Honorable,  the  Home  Member 
(Vincent),  whom  I  had  not  set  eyes  upon;  and, 
therefore,  Sir,  when  I  came  to  this  Assembly  I  came 
with  rage  and  anger  and  I  was  ready  to  pounce  upon 

39 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


him  if  occasion  arose.  But,  Sir,  he  has  disarmed 
me  in  that  respect.  Not  only  he,  but  the  other 
Members  of  Government,  have  also  disarmed  me  in 
this  matter.  What  is  the  cause  for  the  change  in 
the  attitude  adopted  by  us  ?  It  is  all  because  Govern¬ 
ment  as  now  administered  and  advised  are  pursuing 
a  very  sound  policy  indeed.  Their  readiness  to  be 
frank  and  full  in  the  statement  of  their  case,  their 
readiness  to  comply  with  the  legitimate  demands 
made  by  the  peoples’  representatives  in  this  hall  all 
appeal  to  us.  Are  these  the  men,  was  the  question  put 
by  myself  to  myself,  are  these  the  men  who  treated 
Madan  Mohan  Malaviya  with  that  contempt  which 
we  see  in  the  debates?  I  was  surprised  to  see  the 
change  that  had  come  upon  them,  and  I  hold  that  it 
is  due  in  large  measure  to  three  causes  :  First  of  all, 
the  presence  of  my  Indian  friends  in  the  inner 
counsels  of  Government;  secondly,  the  attitude  of 
His  Gracious  Majesty  the  King-Emperor,  and 
thirdly,  Sir,  the  great  event  which  we  witnessed  last 
month  by  which  His  Royal  Highness  the  Duke  of 
Connaught  came  here  to  inaugurate  the  various 
Assemblies.”  Such  was  the  general  spirit  of  the 
Delhi  session  of  1921. 

The  Delhi  session  of  1922  was  much  longer  than 

40 


THE  INDIAN  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY 


its  predecessors,  and  the  attendance  of  members  was 
not  so  good — only  about  40  out  of  120.  The  small 
attendance  was  attributed  to  the  fear  that  members 
would,  on  an  early  day  in  the  session,  have  to  take 
their  stand  for  or  against  a  resolution  which  de¬ 
manded  the  abandoning  of  “repressive  measures.” 
Many  stayed  away  lest  it  be  necessary  to  commit 
themselves.  Thus  at  the  very  outset  of  the  session 
the  Assembly  seemed  to  show  an  inclination  to  run 
away  from  its  responsibilities,  and  an  atmosphere 
inimical  to  good  work  was  created. 

Finally,  the  budget  overshadowed  the  whole 
session.  The  prospect  of  a  big  deficit  and  consequent 
increases  of  taxation  created  pessimism  in  official  and 
non-official  alike.  The  Budget  of  1922  was  a  very 
severe  test  which  some  critics  consider  the  Assembly 
did  not  meet.  It  is  true  that  the  non-official  majority 
seemed  at  times  to  act  irresponsibly,  and  finally  the 
Finance  Bill  was  passed  with  a  deficit  of  over  nine 
crores  (90  million  rupees) .  Little  was  said  and  many 
members  did  not  seem  to  realize  the  financial  and 
economic  effects  of  an  uncovered  deficit  of  this 
magnitude,  and  apparently  the  Assembly  wished  to 
repudiate  responsibility  for  it.  Yet,  even  if  it  did 
act  irresponsibly,  the  British  Government  cannot  ex- 

41 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


pect  responsibility  to  grow  in  a  night,  where  hitherto 
they  have  jealously  withheld  it. 

This  repudiation  of  responsibility  may  have  been 
short-sighted,  and  it  surely  called  forth  a  good  deal 
of  harsh  criticism;  but  it  must  be  remembered  that, 
not  only  in  the  Indian  press,  but  in  practically  every 
British  newspaper  in  India,  the  burden  of  every 
article  on  the  Budget  was  that  the  Assembly  would 
not  be  justified  in  assenting  to  the  expenditure  pro¬ 
posed  by  Government,  especially  on  the  Army.  In 
this  respect,  the  Assembly  was  not  unrepresentative 
of  the  prevailing  educated  opinion  throughout  India. 
Even  the  leading  British  journals  of  Calcutta  and 
Bombay  were  critical  of  Government’s  demands. 

The  relation  of  military  expenditure  to  the  rest 
of  the  Budget  was,  therefore,  the  key  of  the  situation. 
But  since  the  Assembly  was  precluded  by  the  reserva¬ 
tions  of  the  Government  of  India  Act  from  any  direct 
attack  on  the  Army,  it  adopted  the  indirect  method 
of  refusing  to  sanction  the  taxation  necessary  to  meet 
a  service  over  which  it  had  no  control.  If  under 
clause  67 A  of  the  Government  of  India  Act,  the 
Viceroy  had  boldly  assumed  the  statesman’s  right 
to  act  in  the  spirit,  though  straining  the  letter 
of  the  law,  he  might  have  submitted  the  whole 

42 


THE  INDIAN  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY 


budget  or  at  least  the  Army  part,  to  the  vote  as 
well  as  the  discussion  of  the  assembly,  and  then 
the  Finance  Bill  might  have  emerged  in  a  much 
less  battered  form.  The  Assembly  would  then 
have  felt  the  weight  of  responsibility  which  as 
things  went  was  lacking.  By  refusing  to  interpret 
the  Government  of  India  Act  himself,  the  Viceroy, 
said  his  critics,  lost  the  opportunity  of  giving  one 
of  those  political  interpretations  of  a  statute  which 
are  essential  in  working  a  new  constitution. 
Instead,  he  turned  to  the  Law  Officers  of  the 
Crown  in  England  for  an  interpretation,  and  they, 
with  only  legalistic  eyes,  said  the  act  did  not 
give  the  Viceroy  the  power  to  decide.  A  political 
Nelson,  said  a  friendly  critic,  would  have  used 
his  blind  eye  for  the  legalistic  interpretation  and  have 
done  what  he  in  India  could  see  was  best.  As  it  was 
a  check  was  put  to  the  gradual  transfer,  by  conven¬ 
tion  rather  than  by  statute,  of  political  power  to  the 
India  Legislature.  Thus  reminded  of  Indian  subor¬ 
dination  to  Whitehall  the  Indians  proceeded  to  deal 
with  the  budget  and  struck  it  as  often  and  as  hard  as 
they  could. 

The  purpose  of  the  Assembly  was  retrenchment. 
In  trying  to  achieve  it,  the  non-official  majority  acted 

43 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


irresponsibly  (in  a  moral  and  political  sense),  because 
it  was  still  irresponsible  (in  the  constitutional  sense), 
at  least  as  far  as  the  right  to  vote  upon  the  military 
estimates  was  concerned.  It  would  not  have  taken 
this  reckless  course  if  it  had  felt  that  it  wielded  real 
control.  The  Indian  politicians  do  not  yet  realize 
their  actual  powers.  Under  the  Government  of  India 
Act  they  seem  to  have  real  control,  direct  control  over 
many  vital  functions  of  government,  indirect  control 
and  real  influence  over  all  the  rest.  Moreover,  liberal 
Englishmen  in  India  believe  that  until  the  whole 
Budget — excluding  perhaps  the  salaries  of  officers  for 
which  the  Secretary  of  State  is  really  responsible — 
is  submitted  to  the  Assembly  for  discussion  and  vote, 
genuine  political  responsibility  will  be  a  plant  of  very 
slow  growth. 

Government,  indeed,  replies  that  it  cannot  take  the 
risk  of  having  the  Army  cut  to  pieces  in  the  division 
lobby,  but  in  fact  many  military  men  courted  the 
discussion  of  that  budget  in  the  legislative  assembly. 
Moreover,  the  Indians  assert,  so  long  as  the  army 
remains  out  of  their  reach,  the  reforms  are  a  sham. 
The  Indian  view  is  clearly  stated  by  Sir  P.  S. 
Sivaswami  Aiyar,  who  is  not  a  radical.  “What  is 
imperatively  required/’  he  says,  “at  the  present 

44 


THE  INDIAN  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY 


moment  to  convince  the  Indian  public  of  the  desire 
of  the  British  Government  to  enable  India  to  attain 
Dominion  status,  is  a  definite  declaration  of  its  policy 
in  regard  to  the  Army  in  India,  and  a  steady  effort 
to  carry  out  this  policy.  It  must  be  definitely  declared 
that  the  policy  of  the  Government  is  gradually  to 
Indianize  the  Army  in  India  so  that  Indians  may  be¬ 
come  capable  of  undertaking  the  full  responsibility 
for  the  defense  of  their  country.  The  disabilities 
now  imposed  upon  Indians  with  regard  to  their  ad¬ 
mission  into  the  various  branches  of  the  Army  or  the 
Commissioned  ranks  should  be  immediately  removed. 
The  organization  of  the  Army  as  it  now  exists  is  not 
calculated  to  foster  the  development  of  Indian  nation¬ 
hood,  and  no  proposals  for  taxation  for  the  main¬ 
tenance  of  the  present  organization  can  possibly  be 
welcome  to  the  people;  but  if  the  people  can  be  made 
to  realize  that  the  Army  will  be  a  national  army,  and 
that  it  will  afford  the  fullest  scope  for  Indian  valor, 
talents  and  patriotism,  it  would  be  easier  to  carry 
through  the  Legislature  proposals  for  military  ex¬ 
penditure.” 

If  the  Indians  could  vote  on  the  Army  Budget,  in 
which  is  62  per  cent  of  the  net  expenditure,  the 
Assembly  would  then  feel  a  responsibility  which  it 

45 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


does  not  now  possess ;  and  the  more  fully  the  Govern¬ 
ment  is  able  to  place  its  cards  on  the  table,  the  more 
would  the  House  realize  that  it  had  become  a  partner 
in  responsibility  with  the  Governor-General  in  Coun¬ 
cil  for  the  security  of  India.  In  that  event,  not  only 
the  army  estimates,  but  the  whole  Budget  would 
probably  be  less  rudely  handled  by  the  Assembly.  It 
would  be  a  dangerous  experiment,  I  admit,  but  as 
Lionel  Curtis  has  so  well  expressed  it,  the  British 
must  live  dangerously  if  they  are  to  attain  the  great 
ends  they  seek. 

Since  the  process  of  fostering  responsibility  might 
take  time,  and  since,  during  the  process,  mistakes 
would  probably  be  made,  the  power  of  restoration 
might  have  to  be  employed  by  the  Governor-General. 
Lord  Reading  at  first  refused  to  restore  the  rejected 
taxes,  and  the  Indian  Government  for  months  lived 
and  moved  and  had  its  being  in  literal  bankruptcy. 
Before  I  left  India  the  tide  of  criticism  against  Lord 
Reading  was  rising  and  it  was  not  abated  by  this 
action.  He  has  always  irritated  the  official  world  in¬ 
tensely  by  what  it  called  his  “lack  of  decision.”  The 
moderate  Indian  opinion  has,  on  the  whole,  been 
favorable  to  him.  In  the  circumstances  existing,  in 
March  1922,  the  Viceroy,  said  his  critics,  using  his 

46 


THE  INDIAN  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY 


power  to  restore  the  budget  (as  indeed  he  was  obliged 
ultimately  to  do),  would  have  been  in  a  strong  posi¬ 
tion;  for  in  using  this  power  of  restoration  and  in 
justifying  it,  he  would  then  have  been  able  to  appeal 
to  facts  of  which  the  Assembly  are  not  even  now  fully 
possessed.  The  Assembly  would  hardly  be  impervious 
to  such  an  appeal.  Moreover,  if  before  an  impaired 
grant  were  actually  restored,  this  appeal  were  made  in 
the  form  of  an  invitation  to  the  House  to  reconsider, 
the  majority  would  quite  likely  respond  to  it.  There 
is  but  one  way  to  create  responsible  politicians,  and 
that  is  by  giving  them  as  much  real  responsibility  as 
is  compatible  with  the  security  of  their  own  country. 
At  the  time  of  this  writing  the  process  of  certification, 
or  declaring  that  a  bill  shall  become  a  law  in  spite  of 
its  rejection  by  the  Assembly  has  been  resorted  to 
several  times  by  the  Viceroy.  The  bill  for  the  pro¬ 
tection  of  the  Princes  was  certified,  and  that  pro¬ 
viding  for  the  expenses  of  the  Royal  Commission  on 
the  services.  The  heavy  railroad  charges  cut  down 
by  the  assembly  in  order  to  force  the  Government 
to  lessen  the  military  expenditure,  were  restored  by 
Lord  Reading,  and  very  recently  the  doubling  of  the 
salt  tax.  The  N.  C.  O/s  make  much  of  these  restora¬ 
tions  and  cry,  “You  see  we  have  got  nothing.” 

47 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


In  other  respects  the  Assembly  in  the  session  1922- 
23,  displayed  a  real  sense  of  responsibility:  First, 
in  refusing  with  no  dissenting  voice  to  consent  to  the 
release  of  the  Ali  brothers;  second,  in  rejecting  by  a 
majority  the  Resolution  demanding  the  abandoning 
of  “repressive  measures”;  third,  in  the  conduct  of 
the  debate  on  Mr.  Montagu’s  resignation.  Montagu 
stood  for  the  new  era  in  the  Indian  mind,  and  his 
overthrow  was  read  as  a  sign  of  changing  times  in 
England.  Therefore,  the  subject  was  one  filled  with 
serious  possibilities  when  discussed  in  an  Indian 
Legislature.  Finally,  in  rejecting  a  measure  which 
would  have  tied  the  hands  of  local  executive  officers 
in  dealing  with  breaches  of  the  peace,  the  Indian 
majority  showed  its  sense  of  responsibility.  The 
Government,  on  the  other  hand,  joined  the  Indian 
Majority  in  the  repeal  of  the  Rowlatt  Acts,  which 
had,  indeed,  never  been  actually  used  by  the  Govern¬ 
ment. 

The  attitude  of  the  Assembly  towards  the  Govern¬ 
ment  seemed  on  the  whole  friendly.  Racial  feeling 
is  never  wholly  absent,  and  sometimes  rampant  in 
certain  quarters ;  but  it  has  not  affected  the  relations 
between  official  and  non-official.  Sir  William  Vincent, 
the  Home  member,  bears  the  credit  of  having  won 

48 


THE  INDIAN  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY 


and  held  the  respect  and  liking  of  the  whole  House, 
and  thus  of  maintaining  harmony  between  the  two 
sides  of  the  Assembly.  To  the  lead  thus  given  the 
House  seldom  failed  to  respond,  though  it  often 
acted  out  of  sheer  “cussedness.”  It  does  not  yet  fully 
realize  what  “government”  means,  and  does  not  fully 
appreciate  the  problems  which  the  Executive  has  to 
solve.  Parties  are  still  in  embryo.  The  Democratic 
Party,  which  claims  over  fifty  members,  came  into 
existence  early  in  1922,  though  Sir  Frederick  Whyte 
says  that  the  first  sign  of  its  formation  appeared  in 
Simla  (1921)  when  Dr.  Gour  canvassed  a  body  of 
adherents  in  support  of  his  candidature  for  the 
Deputy-Presidency.  It  is  simply  an  opposition  party 
loosely  organized  for  most  practical  purposes,  com¬ 
pact  when  voting  against  Government,  and 
attempting  by  Draconian  rules  to  secure  internal  co¬ 
hesion.  It  has  three  leaders,  or  none!  Dr.  Gour, 
dogged,  persistent,  preternaturally  active,  claims  the 
leadership,  but  Mr.  Rangachariar,  more  able,  genial 
and  eloquent,  exercises  it,  while  Mr.  Seshagiri  Aiyar 
is  said  to  wield  some  influence  behind  the  scenes. 

The  National  Liberal  Party  formed  later  in 
the  Delhi  session  (1922).  Led  by  Sir  Sivaswami 
Aiyar  it  numbers  about  twenty-five  of  the  senior 

49 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


members  of  the  Assembly.  In  debating  power,  in  its 
higher  sense  of  realities,  in  its  ability  to  look  beyond 
the  accidents  of  the  moment,  it  stands  above  the 
Democratic  Party.  In  Mr.  Samarth,  Mr.  Jamnadas 
Dwarkadas,  Moulvi  Abul  Kasem,  and  Sir  Jamsetjee 
Jejeebhoy  it  possesses  men  of  good  parliamentary 
quality  whose  contributions  to  debate  are  always 
pertinent  and  cogent.  Keen  observers  thought  that 
the  party  would  probably  gain  adherents  from  the 
Democrats  and  attract  some  of  those  who  now  stand 
aloof  from  both  organizations. 

The  aims  and  objects  of  the  National  Liberal  Party 
are : 

1.  The  attainment  as  early  as  possible  of  full 
Responsible  Government  in  India  as  an  inte¬ 
gral  part  of  the  Empire. 

2.  The  training  and  equipment  of  the  country 
for  self-defense. 

3.  The  development  of  the  resources  of  the 
country  and  its  Industries  and  Commerce. 

4.  The  progress  of  the  country  all  round  in 
every  department  of  national  welfare. 

The  methods  by  which  it  proposes  to  attain  these 
ends  are : 


50 


THE  INDIAN  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY 


1.  By  peaceful  orderly  and  constitutional  methods 
and  not  by  recourse  to  unconstitutional  or  vio¬ 
lent  methods. 

2.  The  party  is  opposed  to  the  policy  of  pro¬ 
ducing  convulsions  in  the  internal  administra¬ 
tion  of  the  country  for  the  purpose  of  securing 
its  objects  and  more  especially  objects  uncon¬ 
nected  with  the  internal  administration. 

3.  The  immediate  objective  of  the  party  is  full 
provincial  autonomy  and  the  transfer  to  popu¬ 
lar  control  in  the  Central  Government  of  all 
subjects  other  than  defense,  political  and  for¬ 
eign  affairs,  and  ecclesiastical  matters.  They 
propose  also  adequate  safeguards  for  the  pro¬ 
tection  of  all  vested  rights  of  persons  already 
in  the  service  of  the  Crown  and  the  fulfillment 
of  the  country’s  obligations. 

4.  The  party  deprecates  the  use  of  Parliamentary 
deadlocks  merely  for  the  purpose  of  paralyzing 
the  administration  by  obstruction  or  as  a 
means  of  wringing  concessions.  Such  dead¬ 
locks  they  say  form  a  weapon  to  be  most 
charily  used  for  the  purpose  of  securing  com¬ 
pliance  with  the  wishes  of  the  Assembly  in 
matters  of  really  great  importance,  on  which 

5i 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  of  the 
justice  and  expediency  of  the  conclusions  ar¬ 
rived  at  by  the  Assembly. 

5.  The  policy  of  the  party  is  to  train  Indians  in 
all  branches  of  the  defensive  force,  and 
steadily  to  Indianize  the  army  so  that  India 
may  in  the  course  of  time  rely  upon  her  own 
military  and  naval  strength  for  purposes  of 
defense.  This  policy  is  to  be  carried  out  with¬ 
out  imperiling  the  safety  of  the  country.  In 
the  civil  services  the  policy  of  Indianization  is 
also  steadily  to  be  carried  out,  and  they  de¬ 
clare,  the  maintenance  of  a  high  standard  of 
efficiency  and  integrity  in  all  branches  of  the 
administration  should  be  kept  in  view. 

6.  The  development  of  the  resources  of  the 
country,  its  Commerce  and  Industries  should 
proceed  on  the  most  suitable  lines  suggested 
by  the  experience  of  progressive  countries 
which  have  recently  started  on  the  path  of 
economic  development.  The  party  welcomes 
the  cooperation  of  British  capital,  British  busi¬ 
ness  knowledge  and  technical  skill  as  essential 
to  the  rapid  progress  of  the  country.  Cultiva¬ 
tion  of  a  spirit  of  cooperation  and  harmony 

52 


THE  INDIAN  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY 


between  the  British  and  Indians  and  between 
all  classes  of  His  Majesty’s  subjects  is  re¬ 
garded  as  essential  to  national  welfare. 

7.  The  party  is  in  favor  of  protective  tariffs  to 
the  extent  to  which  they  may  be  absolutely 
necessary  for  the  purpose  of  starting  and  estab¬ 
lishing  new  Industries  which  have  a  prospect 
of  success  or  are  essential  to  the  vital  interests 
of  the  country.  Care  will  be  taken  to  see  that 
the  interests  of  the  consumer  are  not  neglected. 

8.  The  party  is  in  favor  of  the  State  management 
of  Railways.  It  will  work  for  economy  in 
every  department  of  public  administration, 
but  without  impairing  its  efficiency. 

9.  Amelioration  of  the  conditions  of  labor  and 
the  improvement  of  the  efficiency  and  well¬ 
being  of  the  laborer  and  the  prevention  of 
conflicts  between  labor  and  capital,  and  of 
direct  action  by  labor  in  the  political  sphere, 
will  engage  the  attention  of  the  party. 

10.  The  promotion  of  the  well-being  of  the  De¬ 
pressed  Classes  and  the  protection  of  the  inter¬ 
ests  of  minorities  will  be  kept  in  view. 

11.  The  party  will  endeavor  to  improve  the  status 
of  Indians  in  the  Colonies. 


53 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


Such  are  the  aims  of  the  National  Liberal  Party 
as  outlined  to  me  by  one  of  its  leaders. 

While  there  is  no  fundamental  difference  between 
the  programs  of  the  two  parties,  there  is  a  real 
difference  of  temper  and  outlook.  The  Democrats 
are  younger,  more  audacious,  more  reckless;  but 
if  they  will  consent  to  follow  faithfully  a  leader  of 
Mr.  Rangachariar’s  caliber,  their  inherent  energy 
might  give  better  results  than  it  has  yet  achieved. 
The  Nationalists  are  the  more  self-restrained  of  the 
two,  and  show  a  better  understanding  of  the  manner 
in  which  the  constitution  ought  to  operate,  and  of  the 
difficulties  unavoidable  in  the  transition  stage. 

As  one  listens  to  the  debates  carried  on,  with  few 
exceptions,  in  English — the  only  tongue  which  all 
can  understand — certain  peculiarities  come  to  the 
fore.  Although  the  Government  benches  represent 
an  irremovable  executive  on  the  one  side,  faced  by 
a  large  constitutionally  irresponsible  Indian  majority 
on  the  other,  there  is  manifest  an  eagerness  to  ex¬ 
plain  fully  the  Government’s  aims,  and  a  strong  de¬ 
sire  to  meet  the  opposition’s  desires  if  it  be  politically 
possible.  Indeed,  to  my  knowledge,  there  has  been 
no  direct  ignoring  of  the  will  of  the  majority  since 
the  new  regime  opened.  The  Indian  members  who 

54 


THE  INDIAN  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY 


at  first  came  half- fearful  to  the  Legislative  Assembly, 
doubting  as  they  came  from  the  elections  whether  they 
really  did  have  anything,  have  begun  to  gain  confi¬ 
dence,  to  lose  their  apologetic  frame  of  mind,  and  to 
assail  the  Government  from  every  side.  One  of  the 
first  speeches  I  heard  was  from  the  eloquent  Ranga- 
chariar,  twitting  the  Government  for  maintaining  an 
army  to  protect  it  against  its  own  people.  Indeed, 
army  expenditure  is  so  constantly  assailed  that  one 
suspects  that  the  eagerness  of  the  Indians  to  reduce 
the  army  has  back  of  it  the  desire  to  weaken  the 
military  force  until  it  can  be  overthrown.  The 
Indians  remind  the  Government  daily  that  an  English 
battalion  costs  21  y2  lakhs  (a  lakh  is  100,000  rupees) 
annually,  as  compared  to  5  lakhs  in  the  case  of  an 
Indian  battalion,  and  here,  says  the  Indian,  drastic 
reform  is  necessary.  They  do  not  consider  the  rela¬ 
tive  efficiency  of  English  and  Indian  battalions, 
though  doubtless  they  do  have  in  mind  their  relative 
potential  loyalty  to  the  British  Government. 

I  had  expected  to  find  the  clashes  chiefly  between 
the  Indian-elected  members  and  the  representatives 
of  Government,  backed  by  the  European  members; 
but  the  bitterest  debate  I  heard  was  between  Moham¬ 
medans  and  Hindus  on  the  resolution  to  withdraw 

55 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


martial  law  from  the  Malabar  region.  The  Indians 
were  afterward  plainly  chagrined  at  this  exhibition  of 
their  lack  of  real  unity.  Three  or  four  debaters  were 
masters  of  relevant,  cogent,  and  moderate  argument, 
showing  debating  talent  of  high  order,  but  the  ma¬ 
jority  were  nearer  the  caliber  found  in  our  average 
state  legislature.  Some  were  unable  to  do  more  than 
read  monotonously  speeches,  which,  one  suspected, 
were  written  by  their  babu  secretaries.  Such  efforts 
soon  emptied  the  House,  as  indeed,  did  occasional 
speeches  in  Urdu,  for  as  one  should  know  practically 
all  of  the  speeches  are  made  in  English,  the  tongue 
best  understood  by  all.  The  Madras  members 
showed  the  highest  debating  talent,  with  Bombay 
next,  and  Bengal  a  low  third,  though  in  the  Bengal 
Council  I  had  heard  Sir  Surendranath  Banerji  make 
the  most  compelling  speech  that  I  heard  in  India. 

Yet  brilliant  as  was  some  of  the  oratory,  and  sub¬ 
tle  as  was  some  of  the  thought  displayed  by  the 
members  of  the  Assembly,  I  should  not  like  the 
task  of  having  to  pick  an  Administration  out  of  the 
body.  They  will  need  years  of  experience  and  drill 
before  they  can  give  the  concentrated  attention,  the 
ceaseless  watchfulness,  the  devotion  to  details,  the 
tireless  hour  after  hour,  day  in  and  day  out  attention 

56 


THE  INDIAN  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY 


which  makes  an  efficient  Administration.  Indeed, 
I  sometimes  wonder,  in  moments  of  doubt,  whether 
the  climate  does  not  forever  preclude  efficiency  of 
administration  by  those  who  dwell  always  under  its 
enervating  influence.  The  English  bring  new  blood 
constantly  from  the  invigorating  air  of  England. 
They,  too,  would  lose  force  and  vigor  if  they  were  to 
stay  generation  after  generation  in  India. 

The  chief  weaknesses  of  the  Legislative  Assembly 
as  a  whole  are  the  failure  to  organize  a  strong  politi¬ 
cal  party  in  spite  of  Mr.  Gour’s  vigorous  efforts  to 
that  end,  and  the  manifest  unwillingness  of  the 
Indians  to  assume  political  responsibility.  Neverthe¬ 
less,  Sir  Frederick  Whyte  left  the  chair  on  the  last 
day  of  the  first  session  “a  confirmed  optimist.”  The 
fact  that  created  in  my  mind  the  greatest  doubt  of 
the  success  of  the  new  venture  was  the  poor  attend¬ 
ance  and  the  nature  of  the  motives  which  one  was 
driven  to  believe  had  kept  the  Indians  away.  Never¬ 
theless,  men  whose  judgment  I  value  and  whose 
knowledge  was  far  greater  than  mine  were  not  so 
pessimistic. 


IV 


REACTION  OF  PRINCES,  OFFICIALS,  CAPI¬ 
TAL,  HINDUS  AND  MOSLEMS  TO  THE 
REFORMS 

The  judgments  passed  on  the  Government  of 
India  Act  are  as  varied  as  the  endless  varieties  of 
people  that  pass  one  daily  in  an  Indian  city.  The 
young  Englishmen  regard  the  Act,  with  its  promise 
of  rapid  Indianization  of  the  services,  as  the  death 
knell  of  all  their  hopes  and  ambitions.  They  blame 
Mr.  Montagu  for  it  and  hate  him  accordingly.  As 
they  see  it,  they  have  trained  for  a  career  which  seems 
doomed  to  vanish.  All  the  old  promises  of  good 
pay,  high  pensions,  polo  ponies  galore,  have  gone 
glimmering.  “If  a  real  estate  agent  had  put  out 
such  a  blue-sky  advertisement,”  I  have  heard  them 
say — referring  to  the  Government  when  it  lured 
them  into  the  services — “he  would  have  been  fined 
and  imprisoned  for  fraud.”  Government  has  no 
sympathy  with  them,  they  declare. ,  It  does  not  tax 
as  it  ought,  and  salaries  are  utterly  inadequate.  All 

58 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


British-Indian  civil  officers,  young  and  old,  have 
been  compelled  to  meet  the  increased  cost  of  living 
by  a  reduction  in  their  former  standard  of  living. 
The  Indian  Civil  Service  is  robbed  of  all  its  charm. 
In  the  old  days  a  man  was  independent,  acted  with 
confidence,  did  his  best,  and  expected  backing;  but 
to-day  there  is  constant  criticism — one  is  always 
worried  lest  there  be  criticism  from  above.  In  the 
country  districts  they  do  not  even  feel  safe  from 
physical  harm.  It  was  all  an  awful  mistake,  they 
hold.  Like  the  unlucky  hero  in  the  Arabian  Nights, 
Montagu  has  let  the  monstrous  evil  genie  out  of  the 
bottle,  and  not  all  the  political  magic  in  the  world 
can  get  it  back  in  again.  They  cannot  see  that  Gov¬ 
ernment  must  ignore  the  assumed  rights  of  these 
hopeful  young  men  if  it  is  to  do  a  manifest  jus¬ 
tice  to  the  three  hundred  and  fifteen  millions  of 
Indians. 

Quite  as  discouraging  to  the  “Services”  as  the 
new  policy  of  Government  is  a  changed  attitude  of 
the  Indian  people  in  many  districts  toward  the  British 
officers.  The  sullen  obedience,  the  menacing  air,  the 
derisive  cries,  the  all-pervasive  race-hatred  in  districts 
where  Gandhi’s  henchmen  were  most  successful,  have 
become  very  discouraging.  I  recall  a  little  Bengalee 

59 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


of  about  fourteen  years  following  a  subdivisional 
officer  who  was  guiding  my  steps  in  a  Bengal  village 
and  shouting,  “there  goes  the  master  of  the  slaves.” 
In  Assam  a  Scotch  police  inspector  described  his  ex¬ 
perience  with  some  angry  tea-grow;ers  among  whom 
he  moved,  he  said,  “like  a  lion  tamer  among  enraged 
lions  in  a  cage.”  One  could  not  expect  good  and  con¬ 
tented  service  from  men  whose  exacting  task,  hard 
at  all  times,  was  under  the  changed  conditions  carried 
out  in  the  midst  of  hostility,  expressed  in  vitupera¬ 
tion,  reckless  misrepresentation,  and  subtle  if  not 
open  threat.  Added  to  this  condition  is  the  depress¬ 
ing  outlook.  Every  English  civil  servant  who  be¬ 
lieves  in  the  sincerity  of  the  Government  of  India 
Act  knows  that  once  he  and  his  colleagues  have 
trained  the  people  of  India  to  a  fitness  for  Dominion 
Home  Rule,  their  occupation  will  be  gone.  The  bet¬ 
ter  they  do  their  work  the  sooner  they  will  abolish 
themselves.  It  is  never  a  pleasure  to  dig  one’s  own 
grave !  As  a  result,  though  the  all-India  service  was 
never  more  needed,  the  aspiring  candidates  have  been 
reduced  more  than  half. 

Aside  from  the  young  men,  the  official  class  in 
general  looks  with  favor  on  the  Act,  and  all  are 
loyal  to  it.  A  governor  of  a  great  Indian  province 

60 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


said  to  me  with  the  deepest  sincerity,  “The  Indian 
people  are  asking  for  freedom,  the  desire  for  which 
we  have  taught  them;  they  want  to  be  masters  in 
their  own  homes  and  controllers  of  the  destinies  of 
their  own  country,  and  my  sympathy  is  so  much  with 
them  that  perhaps  I  want  to  move  forward  too  fast. 
At  least  that  is  better  than  moving  too  slow ;  and  that 
is,  I  fear,  likely  to  be  our  great  danger  here.”  That 
is  not  an  uncommon  sentiment,  though  of  course 
some  take  a  different  view.  A  few  look  upon  it,  said 
Sir  Frederick  Whyte,  as  the  Duke  of  Wellington 
looked  upon  the  Reform  Bill,  “ready  to  take  the 
damned  thing  and  let  it  pass,  because  the  King’s 
Government  must  be  carried  on.”  Such  think  more 
of  British  capital  and  the  future  of  British  officialdom 
in  India  than  of  the  future  of  its  brown  masses  of 
humanity. 

There  is  a  saying  at  Calcutta,  where  the  Scotch 
merchants  predominate,  that  India  is  a  country  con¬ 
quered  by  the  Irish  to  the  end  that  the  English  might 
govern  it  for  the  benefit  of  the  Scotch.  That  epi¬ 
gram  is  too  clever  to  be  taken  seriously,  but  it  can¬ 
not  be  denied  that  many  English  and  Scotch  mer¬ 
chants  and  manufacturers  have  little  sympathy  with 
the  Government  of  India  Act,  and  they  dispose  of 

61 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


it  with  impatient  denunciations  as  “all  d - d  non- 

sense” ;  but  I  must  say  that  I  found  American  busi¬ 
ness  and  professional  men  in  India  just  as  eager  to 
preserve  the  old  British  regime,  and  just  as  intolerant 
of  any  suggestion  that  the  Indians  can  rule  them¬ 
selves.  Their  watchword  in  the  present  troubled 
times  is,  “sit  tight  on  the  valve.”  That  section  of 
the  Indian  press  which  most  assiduously  represents 
the  opinion  of  the  European  commercial  and  manu¬ 
facturing  interests,  complains  the  loudest  against 
the  democratic  tendencies  in  India.  These  journal¬ 
istic  Cassandras,  who  can  write  better  than  they  can 
think,  cry  aloud  in  the  street,  filling  the  ear  with  the 
mournful  strain:  “Melancholy,  indeed,  is  the  state 
of  India.  She  stands  at  the  brink  of  a  great  catas¬ 
trophe.  The  air  is  heavy  with  coming  disaster,  and 
the  material  progress  of  the  last  century  is  threat¬ 
ened  with  destruction.”  Indian  society  is  “rotten,” 
the  new  Indian  is  “a  bastard  monstrosity  and  there  is 
no  truth  in  him.”  Every  evil  that  visits  India  now 
is  laid  to  “new  and  popular  government.” 

English  and  American  critics  of  the  act  point  out 
that  it  is  not  twenty  years  since  the  reformer  Morley 
derided  the  idea  of  representative  institutions  on  a 
parliamentary  model  in  India,  but  now  Parliament  is 

62 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


cajoled  and  hurried  into  a  wild  scheme  devised  by 
‘‘amateur  constructors  of  abstract  constitutions,”  led 
by  a  “globe  trotter  with  a  mania  for  constitution 
mongering.”  By  these  men  the  whole  “fantastic 
scheme”  with  the  “curious  name  of  Dyarchy”  is 
derided  as  a  “hurly-burly  innovation.”  Enemies  say 
that  “No  contrivance  could  possibly  have  been  de¬ 
vised  more  effectually  to  intensify  and  exacerbate 
division,  and  to  produce  a  maximum  of  friction  in 
the  Government  machine.”  It  is,  says  one  critic, 
“one  of  those  specious  paradoxes  which  delight  the 
shallow  brain.”  One  says  we  “have  launched  a  feeble 
bark  constructed  by  pedantry.”  It  has,  the  opponents 
say,  every  practical  defect  that  is  likely  to  appear 
where  pedantic  self-complacency  takes  the  place  of 
experience  and  patient  labor.  All  of  these  members 
of  the  Gloom  family  are  looking  hopefully  forward 
to  its  failure. 

An  Englishman  who  has  had  immense  influence  on 
India,  but  whose  reply  to  the  protest  of  capitalists 
was  given  me  in  confidence,  said:  “If  British  capital 
were  sunk  in  India  in  a  belief  that  the  country  was 
always  going  to  maintain  the  same  form  of  govern¬ 
ment,  and  with  the  same  power  of  Hukim  (command) 
to  a  vegetable  population,  then  the  capitalist  acted 

63 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


with  a  lack  of  foresight  which  characterizes  the 
British  capitalist  in  almost  every  country  of  the 
world.  If  Indians  have  made  statements  which  show 
that  they  are  hostile  to  British  industry,  then  the  fault 
largely  lies  with  the  Anglo-Indian  community  which 
has  held  itself  aloof  from  their  desires,  which  has 
been  contemptuous  of  the  life  of  the  country  in  which 
it  lives,  which  has  taken  no  steps  to  identify  Indian 
interests  with  its  own.”  This  struck  me  as  rather 
acrid,  and  while  I  was  in  India  I  did  not  find  this 
type  of  man  in  the  saddle.  He  may  regain  power 
if  reaction  sets  in,  and  that  would  seem  to  me  a 
great  misfortune.  British  rulers  are  heading  into 
a  stormy  sea,  thick  with  disaster,  if  they  follow  those 
who  stubbornly  insist  upon  autocratic  rule,  to  the 
end  of  time,  for  those  mysterious  millions  who,  in 
the  past,  have  bent  to  their  will.  It  means  breasting 
the  democratic  tide  which  is  sweeping  the  whole 
world  on  to  a  destiny  none  can  see.  Not  even  Brit¬ 
ish  pluck  can  carry  on  against  that  current. 

But  the  distrust  of  the  liberality  of  the  Government 
of  India  Act  comes  not  alone  from  Europeans  and 
Americans.  Many  of  the  native  princes  shake  their 
heads  dubiously  over  it  and  the  Maharaja  of  Alwar 
thinks  the  English  are  mad  to  have  entered  upon 

64 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


such  a  plan.  I  was  immensely  impressed  with  Alwar, 
who  had  the  most  brilliant  Indian  mind  I  found. 
He  invited  me  to  come  to  his  “camp”  in  which  he 
lived  during  the  Prince  of  Wales’  visit  to  Delhi. 
There  I  found  several  large  tents  and  a  number  of 
small  ones,  commonplace  enough  outside  but  most 
amazing  once  I  had  entered.  The  walls  and  ceilings 
were  hung  with  rich  silks ;  the  floors  were  spread  with 
beautiful  Oriental  rugs,  and  the  chairs  and  sofas 
were  sumptuously  upholstered  in  the  richest  mate¬ 
rials.  Carved  tables  and  screens  there  were,  as  in  a 
settled  abode,  and  scattered  about  were  charming 
objets  d’art,  as  if  the  prince  had  settled  there  for  a 
year  instead  of  a  short  week.  The  Maharaja  in¬ 
vited  me  to  go  on  a  two  weeks’  tour  of  his  domains, 
and  said  this  splendid  camp  would  be  moved  from 
place  to  place  as  was  his  custom.  Except  for  his 
palatial  exteriors,  Aladdin  could  have  done  no  more 
with  his  magic  lamp.  When  His  Highness  had  mo¬ 
tioned  me  to  a  seat  at  one  end  of  a  narrow  sofa,  and 
had  seated  himself  at  the  other,  an  obsequious,  richly 
clad  but  barefooted  servant  brought  cigarettes,  and  I 
settled  down  to  an  hour-and-a-half’s  enjoyment  of 
the  most  amazing  monologue  to  which  I  ever  listened. 
In  vain  I  wished  again  and  again  that  I  could  place 

65 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


a  dictaphone  before  those  tightly  drawn  yet  sensuous 
lips,  speaking  the  most  perfect  English,  with  an  ex¬ 
quisite  sense  for  the  exact  word  to  express  the  most 
exalted  thought.  As  I  studied  this  scion  of  an  ancient 
royal  family,  descended  from  the  Solar  dynasty,  I 
noted  first  his  caste  mark,  token  that  with  all  his 
education  and  European  culture  he  is  still  an  ortho¬ 
dox  Hindu.  His  fine,  serious  eyes  seemed  to  have 
looked  deeply  and  cynically  into  life’s  mysteries,  and 
induced  perhaps  the  knitted  brow  and  reluctant  smile. 
The  brow  was  well  forward  of  the  ears  and  perfectly 
molded.  The  dark  face  looked  a  little  careworn. 
They  say  he  has  his  troubles.  He  is  not  a  21 -gun 
maharaja,  though  his  titles  are  like  those  of  Mon¬ 
sieur  Beaucaire  which  it  took  a  strong  man  two 
days  to  pronounce. 

He  rules  some  three  thousand  square  miles,  and  in 
mentality  only  can  he  rival  his  fellow  princes.  A  pol¬ 
ished,  quick,  crafty  ruler,  he  brings  the  methods  of 
Solomon  into  the  twentieth  century  and,  in  his  small 
domain,  makes  the  laws,  executes  them,  and  sits  in 
judgment  on  all  disputes.  As  Lord  Reading  said  re¬ 
cently  in  an  after-dinner  speech  at  the  prince’s  pal¬ 
ace,  “His  Highness  of  Alwar  is  responsible  only  to 
himself  and  his  God.”  Alwar  said  to  me  that  the 

66 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


personal  element  had  gone  out  of  modern  government 
quite  too  much  and  at  the  great  cost  of  real  and 
quick  justice.  Law,  men  had  now,  but  not  justice. 
“I  give  them  justice,”  he  asserted,  with  evident  self- 
satisfaction.  His  Highness  is  quite  contemptuous 
of  the  reformer  class  which  has  come  to  the  top  in 
India,  and  though  not  at  all  eager  for  intimacy  with 
Europeans,  he  is  quite  convinced  that  the  British  rule 
is  best  for  him  and  all  small  princes. 

I  can  recall  only  the  outline  of  his  argument,  not 
the  charm  of  his  diction,  the  range  of  his  thought, 
the  wealth  of  his  illustration.  The  British  Govern¬ 
ment,  he  declared  with  conviction,  is  engaged  in  an 
impossible  undertaking,  trying  to  set  up  democratic 
institutions,  perfected  by  generations  of  struggle 
under  English  conditions,  in  India  where  caste  is 
the  very  basis  of  the  Hindu  religion.  The  caste  sys¬ 
tem  is  one  which  attempts  to  regulate  dharma ,  or  the 
dominant  sense  of  duty,  by  establishing  fixed  groups 
to  do  the  various  tasks  of  life.  It  creates  satisfied 
groups  of  people  willing  to  do  their  duty  within 
their  own  sphere.  The  democracy  which  the  British 
seek  to  set  up,  Alwar  declared,  would  destroy  all  the 
foundations  of  caste  and  with  them  the  Hindu  reli¬ 
gion.  In  a  word,  if  caste  remains,  democracy  will 

67 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


fail;  if  democracy  succeeds,  caste  falls  and  with  it 
the  Hindu  religion.  Such  a  political  system  would 
fail  because  it  would  have  no  basis  in  religion,  the 
only  firm  foundation  of  any  civilization.  One  could 
not  substitute,  within  a  generation,  a  new  basis  of 
civilization,  a  new  religion. 

“Can  you  tell  me,”  Alwar  asked  dramatically, 
“anywhere  in  the  East  where  democratic  institutions 
have  been  engrafted  upon  Oriental  life  and  been  a 
success?  Not  in  Egypt,  not  in  Arabia,  not  in  Persia, 
nor  China,  nor,  if  carefully  analyzed,  in  Japan.” 

I  remember  but  one  of  Alwar’s  beautiful  illustra¬ 
tions  and  of  that  only  the  frame.  He  said  the  British 
folly  was  like  his  own  when,  years  ago,  as  part  of  a 
great  irrigation  scheme,  he  had  planted  certain  needed 
kinds  of  trees,  in  a  certain  order  and  under  scientific¬ 
ally  favorable  conditions.  In  spite  of  every  care  the 
plan  failed,  and  in  disgust  he  hedged  the  area  about 
and  left  it  to  itself.  It  grew  up,  in  time,  a  natural 
jungle  of  fine  trees,  serving  the  same  purposes  which 
he  originally  had  in  view;  but  Nature  had  her  own 
way,  as  she  always  will  in  the  long  run.  It  was  this 
natural  growth  that  he  hoped  for  in  India.  Here  the 
two  peoples  were  side  by  side — British  and  Indians; 
the  one  stressing  the  material  side  of  life,  the  other 

68 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


stressing  the  spiritual  side,  and  brought  together  by 
Providence,  which  moves  in  inscrutable  ways,  to  the 
end  that  the  most  perfect  civilization  which  the  world 
has  known  may  be  evolved.  The  British  qualities 
must  predominate  on  the  political  side,  and  the  Indian 
qualities  on  the  religious  side.  Each  will  complement 
and  be  indispensable  to  the  other,  and  there  should  be 
no  envy,  no  race  hatred.  Each  is  superior  in  its  own 
way;  both  are  needful  for  a  perfect  civilization. 

This  was  a  maharaja’s  view.  The  princes  are 
loyal  supporters  of  the  British  regime.  It  is  their 
shield  and  buckler.  The  Indian  princes  fully  realize 
that  while  they  seem  to  be  left  out  of  this  great  demo¬ 
cratic  experiment,  its  success  will  spell  the  ultimate 
destruction  of  all  their  kind.  To  apply  the  words  of 
Lincoln  to  the  eastern  world,  “India  cannot  endure 
permanently  half  slave  and  half  free.  ...  It  will 
become  all  of  one  thing  or  all  of  the  other.”  In  the 
past  the  British  regime,  leaving  them,  within  certain 
limits,  to  their  own  devices,  has  curbed  but  at  the 
same  time  protected  them,  and  while  the  very  example 
of  British  efficiency  and  British  liberality  in  British 
India  has  compelled  them  in  the  past,  as  well  as  now, 
to  give  their  subjects  greater  freedom  than  they  would 
otherwise,  yet  they  prefer  to  bear  the  evils  they  can 

69 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


measure  than  to  fly  to  others  which  they  know  not  of. 
The  Gaekwar  of  Baroda,  one  of  the  most  advanced  of 
all  Indian  rulers,  has  refused  to  enter  the  Council  of 
Princes  which  is  a  part  of  the  general  scheme.  Bika- 
nir  and  Patiala  and  Mysore,  all  liberal  princes,  who 
have  yielded  generous  reforms  to  their  subjects,  are 
worried  over  the  great  radical  movement  in  India. 
One  maharaja,  a  Maratha,  whose  ancestral  home 
is  the  Deccan,  said  that  his  wise  old  father  counseled 
him  on  his  deathbed,  “Stick  to  the  English  to  the 
last;  but  if  they  ever  fail  you,  fly  to  the  Deccan” — in 
other  words,  to  his  own  people.  I  wondered  why  the 
Gaekwar  of  Baroda  quizzed  me  for  an  hour,  while 
we  were  at  tea,  as  to  the  causes  of  the  American 
Revolution ;  but  perhaps  he  only  wished  to  know  how 
to  head  off  such  cataclysms,  or,  even  more  likely,  he 
was  trying  to  be  polite  to  his  guest. 

Nothing  piques  the  curiosity  of  the  traveler  in 
India  as  its  princes.  I  have  read  whole  solemn  books 
about  “The  Native  States  of  India”  and  about  “In¬ 
dian  Princes,”  but  more  illuminating  to  me  were  bits 
of  gossip  drawn  from  British  residents  at  the  capital 
of  an  Indian  principality,  from  former  ministers  of 
princes,  and  from  English  expert  advisers  to  “Their 
Highnesses.”  Some  seventy  millions  of  Indians  are 

70 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


not  included  in  British  India,  but  are  governed  by 
native  princes  of  every  conceivable  degree  of  political 
advancement  or  of  backwardness.  At  the  capital  of 
each  is  found  a  British  Resident  who  is  always  ready 
to  give  advice,  but  who  rarely  interferes  in  the  actual 
government  by  the  prince.  Lord  Chelmsford  has 
compactly  stated  the  distribution  and  the  relation  of 
native  states  to  the  British  Government :  “There  are 
in  the  Central  Indian  Agency  some  150  states, 
and  in  the  Rajputana  Agency  20  states,  and  in  Balu¬ 
chistan  2  states  under  the  agents  of  the  Governor 
General.  The  rest  of  the  states  are  in  political  rela¬ 
tions  with  the  local  governments.  Madras  deals  with 
5  states;  Bombay  with  350;  Bengal  with  2;  United 
Provinces  with  3;  the  Punjab  with  34;  Burma  with 
32 ;  Bihar  and  Orissa  with  26 ;  the  Central  Provinces 
with  15;  and  Assam  with  16.  (Four  large  states, 
and  one  small,  deal  directly  with  the  Viceroy  through 
their  Resident. )” 

The  British  archives  in  India,  containing  the  cor¬ 
respondence  with  princes  and  residents  and  between 
the  two,  will  perhaps  never  be  opened,  but  any  writer 
of  romance  who  could  dig  his  materials  in  that  treas¬ 
ure  house  would  become  an  object  of  envy  to  all  his 
rivals.  I  shall  never  forget  sitting  in  a  state  of  utter 

71 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


amazement,  fascinated  for  two  hours  by  the  stories 
of  hair-raising  intrigues  related  to  me  by  a  distin¬ 
guished  Hindu,  who  used  to  be  the  prime  minister 
at  the  court  of  a  Maharaja.  Much  that  he  told  me 
I  later  was  able  to  verify,  when  I  met  the  Resident 
who  was  dwelling  at  the  same  court  during  that 
regime.  One  of  the  most  thrilling  stories  has  now 
faded  away  until  I  retain  only  the  fleeting  images  of 
a  pretty  English  nurse,  caring  for  His  Highness’s 
children,  a  visit  of  the  Prince’s  family  to  Darjeeling, 
the  wild  flight  of  the  English  nurse  from  there  back 
to  the  protection  of  the  Resident  at  the  capitol,  an 
effort  of  the  Prince  to  get  the  prime  minister  to  buy 
the  silence  of  the  young  lady,  his  advice  against  such 
folly,  and  thereafter  a  mad  intrigue  to  get  the  min¬ 
ister  out  of  office.  Indeed,  he  was  only  saved  from 
assassination  by  the  firm  support  of  the  Resident. 

Again  a  governor  told  of  the  troubles  in  settling 
the  estates  of  Indian  Princes  at  death.  Though  the 
Governor’s  agents  go  at  once  on  news  by  wire  of  the 
prince’s  death  by  special  train  and  with  motor  cars, 
they  often  arrive  amid  scenes  of  mad  intrigue  and  a 
scramble  for  plunder.  These  agents  have  caught  the 
ministers  making  off  with  chests  of  gold  and  silver 
or  of  money.  The  distant  heirs  sometimes  try  to 

72 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


make  way  with  the  near  ones.  Children  are  murdered 
— smothered  in  closets  and  disposed  of  with  other 
devilish  devices.  At  one  place  the  agents  found 
three  small  children  in  a  chest  of  opium.  One  was 
paralyzed  but  the  others  were  saved.  The  agents 
have  to  lock  up  all  rooms,  close  up  the  palace,  care 
for  all  minors,  and  then  go  about  the  legal  settlement. 

I  asked  a  British  expert  adviser  to  a  famous  prince 
whether  he  saw  any  tendency  of  the  prince  or  his 
Dewan  to  reject  advice  because  of  racial  pride,  or 
because  they  do  not  wish  to  follow  slavishly.  His 
reply  was,  No.  But  he  uses  the  greatest  tact  in  mak¬ 
ing  his  suggestions.  When  I  asked  a  British  Resident 
under  what  circumstances  he  would  feel  called  upon 
forcibly  to  interfere  in  the  affairs  of  the  prince  with 
whom  he  was  stationed,  he  replied,  “Only  in  the  most 
extreme  cases.”  He  told  of  one  Maharaja  who 
had  caused  his  enemy’s  wife  to  be  brought  in,  stripped 
in  his  darbar  room,  and  subjected  to  shocking  indig¬ 
nities  before  the  whole  court.  Again,  when  intoxi¬ 
cated,  he  had  been  induced  by  some  young  fellows 
about  court  to  sign  an  order  to  bring  to  his  palace 
the  wives  and  daughters  of  prominent  citizens  for  the 
pleasure  of  these  young  debauchees.  When  at  last 
they  went  with  such  an  order  to  the  house  of  a  certain 

73 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


citizen,  and  he  chose  to  save  his  honor  by  killing  his 
wife  and  daughters  and  himself,  the  British  Govern¬ 
ment  stepped  in  and  dethroned  the  Indian  Caligula 
whose  drunken  orders  had  caused  this  tragedy.  The 
Raja  of  Puri  was  deprived  of  his  title  of  Maharaja 
for  a  somewhat  similar  offense. 

Again,  a  Maharaja  got  three  years  behind  in  the 
payment  of  his  debts,  and  the  British  Government 
took  over  his  domain  and  administered  his  estate. 
They  put  the  prince  on  a  small  allowance,  and  to  eke 
that  out  he  added  two  wives  to  the  three  he  already 
had  and  got  two  lakhs  (200,000)  of  rupees  thereby. 
When  that  was  spent  he  took  to  plain  brigandage. 
Going  to  a  narrow  pass  between  two  mountains  on 
the  highroad  through  his  dominions,  he  placed  two 
elephants  on  each  side  of  the  road,  drew  up  behind 
them  his  tatterdemalion  army,  which  would  have  put 
even  Falstaff  to  blush,  and  held  up  and  robbed  all 
travelers.  Complaints  poured  in  upon  the  Resident. 
He  sent  for  and  rebuked  the  prince,  who  brazenly 
declared  that  the  terms  of  his  treaty  with  the  British 
Government  would  prevent  the  Resident  from  inter¬ 
fering.  The  treaty  reads,  he  said,  that  “the  British 
Government  will  not  interfere  with  any  of  the  cus¬ 
toms  or  usages  of  state  established  by  tradition.” 

74 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


This  method  of  highway  robbery,  he  asserted,  had 
been  the  custom  of  his  forbears  since  the  memory 
of  man.  Nevertheless,  the  Resident  made  the  preda¬ 
tory  Maharaja  reform  his  ways.  Otherwise,  the 
Resident  told  me,  he  got  on  finely  with  the  prince,  as 
his  successor  failed  to  do,  and  to-day  when  this 
princely  Robin  Hood  meets  the  Resident,  he  comes 
with  open  arms,  crying,  “I  never  have  been  happy 
since  you  left  my  dominions.”  In  general,  a  resident 
assured  me,  the  successful  Resident  acts  with  such 
tact  as  to  get  things  done  without  clash.  Speaking 
of  Lord  Minto’s  declaration  of  non-intervention  in 
the  Native  states,  this  Resident  declared  that  the 
change  at  that  time  was  a  change  of  theory  and  not 
in  practice.  It  had  always  been  the  custom  to  use 
tact  rather  than  the  menace  of  greater  power. 

These  Indian  rulers  range  through  every  thinkable 
stage  from  the  barbarous  to  the  highly  cultured,  and 
their  dominions  from  a  few  thousand  acres  to  many 
thousands  of  square  miles.  Native  princes  and  chiefs 
are  both  Mohammedan  and  Hindus.  Some  are  pro¬ 
gressive,  or  at  least  varnished  with  modern  ideas. 
Some  are  liberal,  some  conservative.  Some  belong 
to  the  Middle  Ages.  A  number  of  princes  are  most 
advanced  in  their  ideas.  They  have  developed  water- 

75 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


power,  agriculture  and  modern  industries.  Some, 
not  mere  benevolent  despots,  have,  like  the  Maha¬ 
rajah  of  Mysore,  granted  their  subjects  democratic 
institutions.  Indians  claim  that  Mysore  is  as  well 
administered  as  British  India.  The  Gaekwar  of 
Baroda  showed  his  scorn  of  ancient  tradition  by 
nominating  an  “untouchable”  to  his  council,  in  de¬ 
fiance  and  to  the  horror  of  the  Brahman  councilors. 
Another  prince,  more  in  the  childhood  of  the  race, 
is  said  to  have  appeared  on  deck  of  a  P.  &  O.  steamer 
wearing  his  crown,  and  seemed  surprised  that  this 
was  not  expected  of  him.  His  Highness  the  Maharao 
of  Cutch  was  highly  praised  by  an  Indian  radical 
because,  as  he  said,  “The  Maharao  doesn’t  approve 
of  having  his  subjects  read  and  write.  He  will  not 
drink  or  eat  with  Western  peoples,  and  he  rigidly 
observes  all  caste  rules.  Railroads  are  not  allowed 
to  invade  his  dominions,  and  though  his  land  is  rich 
in  minerals,  he  will  not  permit  the  introduction  of 
modern  machinery  to  work  them.”  No  promoters 
need  apply !  “He  leaves  racing  and  cricket  and  polo 
to  the  British,  and  takes  his  sport  in  spearing  the  wild 
pig  and  shooting  the  tiger.”  This  prince,  whom  we 
would  call  backward,  was  highly  eulogized  as  a 
“champion  of  the  old  Hindu  system.”  In  fact,  a 

76 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


number  of  the  Indian  nationalists  and  Non-coopera- 
tors  lamented  to  me  that  some  princes  imitated  Brit¬ 
ish  rule,  and  they  thought  it  much  to  be  deplored. 
They  complained  that  in  Jodhpur,  Alwar,  Kathiawar 
States,  Tonk  and  Jaipur,  and  at  Jamnagar  the  meet¬ 
ings  of  Non-cooperators  had  been  forbidden.  The 
Gaekwar  of  Baroda,  too,  discouraged  the  agitator 
and  allowed  no  radical  newspapers.  Nevertheless, 
there  was  a  constant  stream  of  thought  passing  and 
repassing  into  the  Native  states  and  out. 

There  are  in  India  good  rulers  and  bad  rulers  and 
indifferent  rulers.  All  are  proud  aud  some  arrogant. 
They  are  as  jealous  of  their  rights  to  salutes  of 
twenty-one  guns  or  thirteen  guns,  or  any  fixed  quota 
of  guns,  as  a  peacock  of  his  feathers.  Princes  with  a 
salute  less  than  nine  guns  are  not  entitled  to  be  ad¬ 
dressed  as  “His  Highness.”  Their  dignity  is  usually 
expressed  with  elephants,  ornate  howdahs,  golden 
umbrellas,  priceless  diamonds  or  pearls  and  the  pomp 
and  glory  of  their  retinues.  All  Indians  are  highly 
sensitive  as  to  their  relative  position  at  a  banquet,  or 
in  a  ceremonial  sitting,  but  a  maharajah  has  been 
known  to  faint  away  on  learning  that  his  seat  had 
been  placed  a  little  lower  down  than  was  the  custom, 
and  I  was  told  of  one  who  endured  the  shame,  sat 

77 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


dazed  during  a  ceremony,  and  then  walked  away,  for¬ 
getting  his  retinue,  and  lost  his  way  in  city  streets, 
where  his  servants  found  him  wandering  as  one  dis¬ 
traught.  Blows  to  prestige  are  more  staggering  to  an 
Indian  prince  than  blows  on  the  head.  The  reduction, 
or  the  deprivation  of  a  salute,  is  regarded  as  a  public 
disgrace.  The  decision  of  the  Viceroy  as  to  such 
matters  of  precedence  is  final. 

The  new  spirit  of  democracy  in  India  had  thus 
far  not  made  itself  felt  much  in  the  Native  States. 
A  British  expert  adviser  to  a  great  Indian  Prince 
explained  to  me  his  theory  why  Gandhi  does  not  in¬ 
clude  native  states  in  his  propaganda.  “He  knows 
that  the  basis  of  his  agitation  is  racial  pride  offended 
by  being  governed  by  a  foreign  race.  In  native  states 
the  rule  may  be  much  more  despotic,  even  tyrannous, 
but  it  is  by  native  princes,  and  fie  cannot  make  the 
same  appeal.”  Princes,  on  the  other  hand,  realize 
the  danger  from  this  agitation.  Their  people  feel  the 
agitation  by  contagion  from  neighboring  states. 
T.  V.  Seshagiri  Aiyar  declares  that  the  Indians  take 
pride  in  the  power  of  their  princes  even  when  they  are 
despotic,  even  when  tyrannical.  “Far  better/’  he  cries, 
“to  have  deportations  and  incarcerations  than  to  be 
instruments  for  compelling  their  Prince  to  yield  up 

78 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


even  an  inch  of  the  power  which  the  treaty  (which 
every  Prince  has  with  the  British  Government)  has 
conferred  on  them.” 

“The  subjects  of  an  Indian  prince  should  be  hap¬ 
pier  than  those  in  British  India,”  said  Seshagiri 
Aiyar,  but  Sir  Narayan  Chandavarkar  doubted 
whether  they  were  in  fact.  In  most  cases,  he  said, 
they  did  not  dare  complain.  Like  Haroun  Alraschid, 
Sir  Narayan  used  to  go  in  the  early  morning 
incognito  and  talk  with  the  Indian  villagers  in  a 
native  state  of  which  he  was  prime  minister.  The 
people  complained  bitterly  of  the  way  the  tax  col¬ 
lectors  exacted  bribes.  They  complained  of  oppres¬ 
sion,  neglect  of  sanitation,  and,  in  general,  held  that 
the  Maharaja  looked  upon  the  law  as  something 
for  application  to  his  people,  but  not  to  him.  “But 
on  the  other  hand,”  said  a  native  of  Indore,  “in 
British  India  the  people  feel  the  Collector  all  the 
time,  while  in  my  state  the  land  tax  is  paid  twice  a 
year,  and  though  the  tax-gatherer  exacts  bribes,  he 
is  soon  gone,  and  nothing  more  is  heard  of  Govern¬ 
ment  for  the  rest  of  the  year.  In  British  India  civil 
officers  are  forever  passing  around  the  district,  and 
the  natives,  wishing  to  stand  in  with  them,  have  to 
furnish  them  with  food  and  lodgings  and  horses.” 

79 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


A  collector  of  long  experience  in  British  India 
told  me  of  an  official  tour  he  took  in  a  native  state, 
neighboring  his  own  district.  He  was  met  by  a  lot 
of  tatterdemalion  soldiers,  with  gay  uniforms,  in 
rags,  and  carrying  swords.  They  escorted  him  with 
comic  ceremony.  He  found  oppression,  wretched 
sanitary  conditions,  individuals  persecuted  by  under¬ 
paid  agents  of  the  Prince,  who  had  to  make  up  their 
salaries  by  bleeding  the  subjects,  but  nevertheless  he 
thought  that  the  average  individual  led  a  much  more 
happy  existence,  unperturbed  by  official  visits — the 
jolly,  careless  life  which  they  preferred.  He  con¬ 
fessed  that  the  Indians  in  British  India  are  annoyed 
by  constant  visits  and  requisitions  for  food  and 
horses  and  sundry  other  things.  One  agent  compels 
vaccination,  another  forces  treatment  of  cattle  for 
rinderpest,  another  gets  all  the  children  together  to 
see  if  all  are  at  school.  “With  best  intentions,  the 
people  in  British  India  are  overgoverned,”  he  feared. 

A  governor  of  a  great  province  modified  that  view 
by  the  assertion  that  the  subjects  of  Indian  princes 
used  to  turn  to  the  Sirkar  (the  British  official),  but 
now  under  the  new  regime,  when  the  Viceroy  ties  the 
hands  of  the  Provincial  Government,  the  people  find 
their  appeal  in  vain,  and  turn  to  the  Indian  agitators 

80 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


in  British  India  who  champion  their  cause  against  all 
rulers.  Under  the  present  regime,  he  said,  we  can  do 
nothing  but  offer  mild  advice  to  the  Indian  Prince, 
and  when  the  patience  of  his  subjects  becomes  ex¬ 
hausted,  deplorable  events  like  those  in  the  Tonk 
state  occur,  the  subjects  rise  in  justifiable  revolt  and 
they  have  to  be  put  down  by  force.  As  a  result  a 
good  deal  of  serious  injustice  and  oppression  exists 
in  backward  Indian  states.  Nevertheless,  asserted  a 
rich  merchant  from  Indore,  “though  we  are  not  better 
fed,  or  clothed,  or  cared  for  in  time  of  famine,  we  in 
the  native  states  are  happier.” 

Taking  into. consideration  all  the  facts  about  the 
Indian  princes  and  their  states,  it  is  plain  that  they 
are  not  to  be  ignored  in  any  plans  for  the  future  of 
India.  Lord  Sydenham  has  stated  of  personal  knowl¬ 
edge  that  some  of  the  native  rulers  have  already 
marked  out  the  areas  which  they  will  annex  when  the 
chaos  which  they  foresee  comes  to  pass,  and  in  New 
India ,  Mrs.  Annie  Besant’s  paper,  it  was  pointed  out 
that  most  people  ignore  the  Indian  princes  when  they 
are  talking  about  setting  up  an  Independent  Indian 
Republic.  They  seem  to  forget  how  large  a  part  of 
India  is  ruled  by  her  own  sons,  and  that  these  possess 
very  fair  armies  with  which  to  defend  their  thrones. 

81 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


Doubtless  not  all  are  of  the  same  mind  as  the  Maha¬ 
raja  of  Alwar,  but  some  must  share  his  vision 
expressed  at  a  speech  in  his  own  palace  in  March 
1922,  when  he  was  entertaining  the  Viceroy:  “I 
have  somehow  learned  to  believe  that  the  destiny  of 
the  West,  as  represented  by  Britain,  has  been  brought 
into  contact  with  the  East,  as  represented  by  India, 
by  no  mere  chance  or  any  haphazard  circumstance. 
The  internal  tradition  of  India  has  been  to  look  to  the 
inner  things  of  life,  to  be  introspective  and  to  fathom 
the  secrets  of  God  and  life.  Self-realization,  in  other 
words,  has  been  the  goal  of  the  East.  The  West,  on 
the  other  hand,  has  looked  to  the  outside  world  to 
conquer  nature  in  order  to  enable  it  to  help  humanity. 
Each  has  a  definite  aim  and  a  great  deal  to  give  to  the 
other.  Slavish  imitation  is  death,  but  assimilation 
of  the  best,  when  the  roots  are  firmly  imbedded  in 
one’s  own  soil,  is  life.  The  materialism  of  the  West 
cannot  survive  by  itself  any  more  than  the  spiritu¬ 
ality  of  the  East  can  be  put  into  practice  without  the 
union  of  both.  I  believe  that  a  higher  destiny  has 
willed  that  the  two  nations  which  have  been  brought 
together  are  not  going  to  part  asunder  until  a  higher 
civilization  has  been  evolved,  where  the  spirituality 
of  the  East,  mingling  with  the  sciences  and  the 

82 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


material  progress  of  the  West,  will  bring  the  millen¬ 
nium  for  the  world.  It  is  only  then  that  equality  will 
come;  it  is  then  we  can  mutually  shake  the  hand  of 
friendship  and  serve  each  other,  combine  together 
and  make  an  Empire  that  may  well  be  the  envy  of 
history  and  of  the  world.  This  is  the  destiny,  in  my 
estimation,  that  India  has  to  fulfill;  this,  according 
to  my  ideals,  is  her  highest  swaraj .” 

“My  goal,”  Alwar  declared,  “is  the  United  States 
of  India,  where  every  Province  and  every  State, 
working  out  its  own  destiny  in  accordance  with  its 
own  environment,  its  own  tradition,  history  and 
religion,  will  combine  together  for  Imperial  purposes, 
each  subscribing  its  little  quota  of  knowledge  and 
experience  in  a  labor  of  love,  freely  given  for  a  higher 
and  a  nobler  cause.” 

This  formal  speech  was  so  similar  to  what  he  had 
said  to  me  two  months  earlier  in  private  conversation 
that  I  feel  assured  the  vision  was  not  the  dream  of  a 
moment  but  the  fixed  idea  toward  which  he  at  least 
will  try  to  lead  his  people. 

Alwar’s  dream  was  a  very  different  reading  of  the 
hand  of  Fate  from  that  given  me  by  Gandhi  and  his 
followers;  different,  indeed,  from  all  the  factional 
Indian  views.  Although  I  found  many  shades  of 

83 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


opinion,  all  might  be  grouped  into  conservative, 
moderate,  nationalist,  and  “non-cooperating”  fac¬ 
tions.  Even  the  Conservatives  had  national  pride, 
and  dreamed  of  some  far-off  day  when  great  masses 
of  Indian  people  should  have  been  trained  to  political 
experience,  and  when  the  task  might  with  safety  be 
taken  over  wholly  by  India’s  best  political  talent. 
But  they  fully  realized  the  magnitude  of  the  under¬ 
taking  to  raise  over  three  hundred  millions  of  people 
from  the  depths  of  medieval  ignorance  and  super¬ 
stition  to  a  degree  of  civilization  fairly  commensurate 
with  that  dominant  in  those  parts  of  the  world  where 
democracy  is  a  success.  Men  of  this  group  had,  as  a 
rule,  great  financial  interests  and  were  in  no  hurry 
to  see  government  transferred  to  their  less  efficient 
countrymen.  They  pay  lip-service  to  swaraj,  because 
any  Indian  would  be  proclaimed  disloyal  to  India 
who  did  not  favor  ultimate  self-rule,  but  they  are 
willing  to  wait  generations  if  need  be  for  the  beauti¬ 
ful  Utopia.  The  more  remote  it  is  the  more  beautiful 
it  looks  to  them. 

The  second  group,  the  Moderates,  like  Sir  Suren- 
dranath  Banerji,  Sir  Narayan  Chandavarkar,  and 
Lord  Sinha,  were  often  found  in  high  Government 
positions,  or  had  a  large  stake,  economic  or  social, 

84 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


which  curbed  their  eagerness  for  swaraj  (self-rule). 
Nevertheless,  they  wished  to  see  the  pace  quickened 
which  takes  them  toward  a  self-governed  India. 
They  hoped  in  their  own  lives  to  see  the  Promised 
Land.  The  Government  of  India  Act  was  very  good 
for  a  start,  but  more  must  come.  They  uttered  many 
complaints  against  the  British  raj  (rule),  but  thought 
it  the  only  safe  one  at  present.  They  had  more  con¬ 
fidence  in  their  own  people  than  was  shown  by  the 
Conservatives,  but  it  was  not  boundless.  They 
recognize  great  danger  in  an  immediate  taking  over 
of  the  rule  of  India  by  Indians.  These  Moderates 
are  often  not  quite  sure  of  the  good  faith  of  the 
English  in  furthering  self-government,  but  are  will¬ 
ing  to  accept  the  Government  of  India  Act,  enter  the 
councils  and  assembly,  and  make  government  so  un¬ 
happy  by  constant  attacks  that  it  will,  as  they  imagine, 
hasten  the  day  of  complete  emancipation.  To  this 
end  they  introduce  resolutions  to  annoy  Government, 
to  which,  if  passed,  no  human  ingenuity  could  give 
effect,  and  cry  out  against  grievances  inherent  in  all 
government,  and  which  even  the  rulers  of  Utopia 
could  not  have  remedied.  Having  no  real  ultimate  re¬ 
sponsibility,  they  are  free  to  make  bids  for  popularity 
where  responsible  legislators  would  fear  to  tread. 

85 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


The  “grand  old  man  of  Bengal,”  as  his  friends 
called  him,  Ananda  Chandra  Roy,  said  sadly:  “It 
will  be  long  before  my  people  will  be  ready  to  take 
up  the  burden  of  their  own  government.  With  very 
few  exceptions  they  have  not  shown  capacity  to  man- 
age  big  business.  But  government  is  big  business. 
Indians  must  learn  to  take  responsibility  for  big 
things  in  business  before  they  try  to  manage  a  vast 
country  with  hundreds  of  languages,  hundreds  of 
different  states,  with  great  rivalry  between  Hindu 
and  Mohammedan,  with  caste  distinctions  and  other 
conditions  that  make  for  disorder.  Only  the  Tatas — 
and  they  are  Parsis — have  shown  marked  capacity. 
In  Bengal,  the  zamindars  (great  landholders),  in 
spite  of  their  big  incomes,  are  all  bankrupt.”  Sir 
Narayan  Chanda varkar  talked  in  the  same  way  about 
Indian  efficiency  in  government.  “Alas,  we  are  very 
indolent,  and  it  takes  energy  and  untiring  effort  to 
govern  well.  Because  Indians  do  not,  as  a  rule,  have 
that  capacity  for  tireless  devotion  to  details,  they  do 
not  succeed  in  carrying  on  big  business.  Constant, 
persistent  attention  to  details  is  foreign  to  them. 
Tata,  and  two  or  three  others,  are  the  only  excep¬ 
tions.”  He  hoped,  nevertheless,  that  they  would  in 
time  learn  this  virtue  from  the  English.  Similar 

86 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


confessions  were  made  to  me  daily  by  high-minded 
and  sincere  Indians  whose  patriotism  I  could  not 
doubt. 

But  there  were  two  other  classes  of  Indian  leaders, 
Nationalists  and  “Non-cooperators,”  who  aimed  at 
the  same  thing,  but  would  attain  the  goal  by  different 
means.  The  Nationalists,  bitterly  denouncing  the 
Government  of  India  Act  as  utterly  inadequate, 
would  nevertheless  enter  the  legislative  assembly  or 
the  provincial  councils,  and,  fighting  the  British  by 
constitutional  methods,  force  further  concessions. 
The  British  respect  this  attitude  and  make  no  com¬ 
plaint  of  opposition  which  is  carried  on  in  a  constitu¬ 
tional  way.  The  Gandhi  followers  would  refuse  to 
have  anything  to  do  with  the  Government  of  India 
Act,  and  by  non-cooperation  with  Government  bring 
it  to  a  standstill.  Both  want  swaraj  at  once,  imme¬ 
diate  transfer  of  all  political  power  to  the  Indians. 
The  least  they  will  accept  is  a  definite  promise,  a  fixed 
schedule  of  progress  toward  self-government.  “Let 
the  British  tell  us  that  next  year  they  will  give  us 
control  of  finance,  that  five  years  hence  they  will  give 
us  full  control  of  the  military  affairs,  but  let  them  not 
vaguely  say  that  when  we  have  shown  our  fitness 
they  will  reward  us  with  more  responsibilities.  Who 

87 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


are  they  that  they  should  set  themselves  up  as  the 
arbiters  of  our  political  destiny?  We  are  as  com¬ 
petent  as  they  to  determine  when  we  have  attained 
political  fitness.  This  is  our  country,  not  theirs,” 
they  fiercely  proclaim,  “and  it  is  not  for  them  to 
assert  their  superiority  and  to  take  credit  for  benevo¬ 
lence  because  of  what  they  grant  us.  Moreover,” 
they  conclude,  “how  are  we  to  get  political  experience 
out  of  this  artful  device?  After  all,  what  is  the 
system  to  which  the  reformists  pin  their  faith?  A 
scheme  whereby  the  bureaucracy,  which  retains  con¬ 
trol,  is  to  ‘train’  Indians  for  self-government,  by 
means  of  coalition  cabinets,  composed  partly  of  offi¬ 
cials  and  partly  of  Indian  Ministers.  Will  the 
officials  train  for  self-government?  Will  men  whose 
whole  training  has  been  autocratic,  whose  class  and 
race  interests  are  bound  up  with  ascendency,  whose 
traditions  are  all  of  despotic  rule — will  such  as  these 
cast  aside  everything,  training,  interests,  and  tradi¬ 
tions,  and  become  apostles  of  liberty?  Dyarchy  is 
no  school  for  freedom,”  they  cry. 

As  to  the  competence  of  Indians  to  undertake  self- 
rule  at  once  there  is  an  interesting  difference  between 
the  Indian  city  dwellers  and  those  whose  lives  are 
spent  in  the  country  districts  (the  mofussil,  as  they 

88 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


say  in  India).  Educated  Indians  in  Calcutta,  Bom¬ 
bay  or  Madras,  surrounded  by  their  more  or  less 
sophisticated  fellow  citizens,  and  knowing  little  of 
the  abysmal  political  ignorance  of  peasant  classes 
in  the  villages,  will  think  you  are  jesting  if  you  ven¬ 
ture  to  doubt  India’s  present  fitness  for  self-rule.  In 
the  country  towns,  on  the  other  hand,  the  educated 
Indian,  doctor,  lawyer  or  editor,  is  perfectly  able  to 
grasp  your  doubt  as  to  whether  swaraj  is  a  practical 
measure  in  the  near  future.  Castes  are  too  jealous 
of  each  other,  they  concede;  religious  groups  are  too 
intolerant.  There  are  too  many  dissensions  among 
us,  they  say,  and  the  lawless  elements  are  too  eager 
to  take  advantage,  if  the  efficient  British  administra¬ 
tion  were  to  be  withdrawn.  Hindu  suspects  Moham¬ 
medan,  and  the  Sons  of  the  Prophet  distrust  the 
Hindu.  For  all  these  reasons  the  cautious  Indian  of 
the  professional  classes  in  the  mofussil  is  ready  to 
wait,  sadly  often,  but  not  in  doubt  as  to  the  wisest 
course.  And  thus  patriotic  Indians  are  divided. 
Some  would  keep  the  British,  some  would  drive  them 
out;  but  all  would  have  them  give  up  their  claim  to 
the  right  to  determine  when  the  Indians  were  ready 
for  swaraj. 

Some  admitted  that  they  would  be  glad  to  profit 

s9 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


for  a  time  by  the  British  experience  in  governing. 
Many  had  the  curious  idea  that  the  British  would 
give  them  naval  and  military  protection  while  sur¬ 
rendering  political  control.  The  British,  in  a  word, 
were  to  “keep  the  ring”  while  the  Indians  played  at 
politics,  serenely  free  of  the  ultimate  responsibility 
of  governors.  When  I  asked  what  motive  the  British 
Government  would  have  for  assuming  such  a  burden, 
they  seemed  surprised  at  my  cynical  ignorance  of 
altruism.  Besides,  they  explained,  we  would  protect 
British  capital  and  interests  in  return  for  the  security 
they  would  give  us.  “You  expect,  then,”  I  said,  “that 
all  of  the  British  people  will  assume  a  military  bur¬ 
den  and  expense  in  order  that  a  very  few  may  have 
their  Indian  property  protected.”  Our  Filipino 
fellow  citizens  I  found  entertaining  like  ideas. 

A  faction  of  the  Nationalists,  who  during  the 
time  of  my  visit  had  been  overcome  by  Gandhi’s 
mastery  of  the  All-India  Congress,  was  the  Moham¬ 
medan  group  once  led  by  Mohammed  and  Shoukat 
Ali.  It  was  the  first  who  said  at  Allahabad,  “If 
twenty  crores  (two  hundred  million)  of  Hindus  can¬ 
not  liberate  India  without  foreign  help,  I  hope  and 
trust  that  seven  crores  of  Mussulmans  can  and  will. 
If  the  Amir  of  Afghanistan  fights  the  enemy  of  Islam 

90 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


he  would  have  my  entire  support.  If  he  fights  the 
present  governors  of  India  because  they  are  turbulent 
neighbors,  he  has  my  entire  sympathy.”  Again  he 
said,  “I  am  a  Moslem  first  and  everything  else  after¬ 
wards.”  He  openly  hoped  that  Mustapha  Kemal 
Pasha  would  come  to  India’s  aid.  This  fire-eater 
Gandhi  seemed  to  place  under  the  yoke,  and  to  lead 
chained  to  his  non-violent  chariot  wheels.  But  all 
the  natural  impulses  of  these  Ali  brothers  led  them 
to  violence,  and,  considering  their  menacing  speeches, 
and  their  proven  intrigues,  the  British  Government 
seemed  amply  justified  in  placing  such  declared 
enemies  behind  the  bars.  There  they  were  as  a  warn¬ 
ing  to  all  Moslem  agitators  to  keep  at  least  within  the 
bounds  of  the  law.  Their  adherence  to  Gandhi  was 
thought  by  many  to  be  a  mere  convenient  cloak  for 
their  real  preference  for  a  fight.  Opinion  differed, 
however,  and  others  thought  the  Mohammedans 
really  embraced  the  Gandhi  principles,  if  for  no  other 
reason,  that  they  might  secure  Hindu  support.  Both 
these  and  the  followers  of  Gandhi  were  ready  to 
wash  their  hands,  if  need  be,  of  all  British  contacts. 

At  the  present  moment  the  political  parties  in  India 
may  be  roughly  divided  into  ( i )  extreme  Reaction¬ 
aries,  (2)  Moderates,  (3)  Nationalists,  (4)  Non- 

9i 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


cooperators,  who  would  give  up  that  program  in 
order  to  enter  the  legislative  bodies  and  wreck  them, 
and  (5)  Non-cooperators,  who  remain  true  to  the 
Gandhi  principle.  A  seventh  group,  chiefly  Moham¬ 
medans,  keeps  on  the  cloak  of  the  N.  C.  O.,  but  at 
heart  would  like  to  resort  to  a  campaign  of  violence 
in  order  to  bring  the  British  to  their  terms.  Among 
the  extreme  Reactionaries  are  certain  types  of  British 
business  men  who  see  in  India  only  an  opportunity 
to  get  rich  quickly.  They  have  no  sympathy  with 
schemes  to  give  India  self-government.  They  are 
not  numerous,  but  they  are  powerful.  Many  of  the 
great  Indian  landholders  who  get  their  rents  regu¬ 
larly  because  of  the  efficiency  of  the  British  regime 
are  in  this  group,  and  pay  only  lip-service  at  the  best 
to  the  idea  of  Indian  self-rule.  Many  of  the  Indian 
princes  like  the  old  regime  best  and  are  silently  con¬ 
temptuous  of  those  who  would  fly  to  evils  they  know 
not  of. 

In  the  Moderate  group  one  would  put  the  more 
liberal  British  business  men,  the  prosperous  Parsis 
of  the  Bombay  district,  and  Indians  in  general  whose 
social  or  official  position,  great  wealth,  or  natural 
conservatism,  causes  them  to  view  with  alarm  any 
but  a  gradual  change.  These  do  not  wish  to  risk  the 

92 


REACTION  TO  THE  REFORMS 


immediate  future  of  the  country  in  untrained  and 
untried  hands.  They  would  have  India  rule  herself 
when  she  has  men  of  experience,  trained  in  the 
British  school,  who  can  bear  the  burden.  The 
Nationalist  group  contains  many  Indians  of  ability 
and  prominence  such  as  Sastri  and  Sir  Jamsetjee 
Jeejeebhoy,  members  of  the  National  Assembly  or 
Council  of  State,  and  ministers  in  the  several  prov¬ 
inces,  or  members  of  provincial  councils.  Much  of 
the  finest  talent  in  India  is  found  in  this  party.  It 
stands  for  gaining  self-rule  for  India  at  the  earliest 
possible  moment  that  it  can  be  won  by  constitutional 
means.  It  takes  part  in  working  the  machinery  of 
the  new  Government  of  India  Act,  but  it  uses  it  to 
drive  the  British  Government  to  more  concessions. 
As  a  rule,  its  members  believe  in  keeping  India  within 
the  British  Empire,  but  it  must  be  free  as  Canada  or 
Australia  is  free.  The  group  of  Non-cooperators, 
once  wholly  dominated  by  Gandhi,  has  now  broken 
into  two  factions.  One,  under  the  leadership  of 
C.  R.  Das,  would  enter  the  Councils  and  National 
Assembly  by  electing  members  during  the  elections 
of  November  1923,  and  from  within  the  constitu¬ 
tional  government  make  the  British  all  the  trouble 
possible — either  rule  or  ruin.  Some  of  this  faction 

93 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


wish  India  to  remain  within  the  British  Empire; 
some  would  cut  away  entirely.  The  opposing  faction 
wishes  to  go  on  with  the  old  Gandhi  program  of  non¬ 
violent  non-cooperation,  perfecting  the  great  political 
machine  by  which  they  get  control  of  the  masses 
until  they  can  bring  the  British  to  their  knees. 
Finally  there  is  a  group,  largely  found  in  Northwest 
India,  made  of  Mohammedans,  with  fighting  blood, 
who  wish  to  dare  all  and  try  to  force  the  British  into 
the  sea.  Gandhi  partly  subdued  these  men,  but  they 
were  never  wholly  convinced  of  the  wisdom  of  his 
plan.  Such  are  the  various  factions  which  struggle 
for  dominance  in  India. 


V 

MAHATMA  GANDHI,  SAINT  OR 
DEMAGOGUE? 

It  is  the  Non-cooperators  and  their  leader  who 
most  challenge  the  world’s  attention.  As  to  Mohan¬ 
das  Karamchand  Gandhi,  the  great  leader  of  the 
Indian  masses,  I  found  the  utmost  variance  of 
opinion.  Is  he  politician,  demagogue  or  saint?  Dr. 
Jekyl  or  Mr.  Hyde?  Is  he  “that  lunatic,”  as  I  heard 
a  British  general  call  him,  or  a  seer  comparable  to 
Buddha  or  Confucius?  Is  he  “that  blackguard”  or  a 
“reincarnation  of  Vishnu,”  as  I  was  repeatedly 
assured?  Is  he  “filled  with  humility,”  or  has  atten¬ 
tion  made  him  “vain  of  his  power”  so  that  “he  even 
kicks  out  those  who  push  too  near  him?”  Only  one 
thing  is  certain,  and  that  is  that  this  prophet,  if  he  is 
one,  has  more  followers  than  any  other  prophet  in  the 
world’s  history  enjoyed  during  his  own  lifetime.  To 
answer  the  questions  which  crowded  up  before  me 

95 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


as  soon  as  I  landed  in  India,  I  read  all  that  Gandhi 
had  written  upon  which  I  could  lay  my  hands,  and, 
more  important,  I  arranged  to  visit  him. 

It  was  at  Ahmedabad,  during  the  late  December 
meeting  of  the  All-Indian  Congress,  that  I  first  saw 
Gandhi.  Mr.  Amballal,  a  rich  mill-owner,  kindly 
arranged  the  meeting.  In  his  car  we  drove  to  the 
Congress  Hall,  erected  outside  the  walls  of  Ahmeda¬ 
bad,  near  the  vast  tent  city  built  to  house  the  many 
thousand  delegates  and  their  friends.  All  the  curious 
square  tents  were  built  of  slight  wooden  frames  cov¬ 
ered  with  Indian  woven  cotton  cloth,  or  khaddar. 
The  thousands  of  visitors  had  come,  as  is  the  custom 
all  over  India  in  attending  fairs  or  sacred  festivals, 
literally  taking  up  their  beds  and  walking,  at  least  to 
and  from  the  railroad  station.  Their  wants  are  few : 
a  blanket,  a  bag  of  rice,  a  simple  cooking  utensil  or 
two.  If  it  is  warm,  they  wear  little  but  a  loin-cloth; 
if  cold,  they  wrap  their  many-colored  blankets  around 
them.  One  missed  the  picturesque  turban  or  other 
headdress,  because  all  the  faithful  wore  the  Gandhi 
cap — a  homely  white  skullcap,  hopelessly  inartistic, 
but  the  token  of  submission  to  the  will  of  the  great 
“Mahatma.” 

As  we  neared  the  Congress  Hall,  with  the  giant 

96 


MAHATMA  GANDHI 


spinning  wheel  before  it — Gandhi’s  device  for  win¬ 
ning  economic  independence — we  met  the  thousands 
of  delegates  coming  out.  Everybody  seemed  to  know 
Mr.  Amballal,  but  they  looked  at  me  with  curiosity. 
“Gandhi  is  coming  and  will  soon  be  in  his  tent,”  was 
the  answer  to  the  questions  of  my  Indian  friend.  We 
turned  aside,  worrying  our  way  through  numbers  of 
tongas,  autos,  and  pedestrians,  and  drove  as  near  as 
we  could  get  to  Gandhi’s  tent;  then  walked  through 
a  narrow  lane  made  by  the  ten  thousand  wildly  en¬ 
thusiastic  Indians  shouting:  “Mahatma  Gandhi  ki 
jai!”  (Victory  for  Gandhi,  the  holy  man.)  I  have 
seen  many  American  crowds,  madly  shouting  their 
admiration  for  Roosevelt,  but  never  with  greater 
devotion  than  that  of  these  dusky-skinned  masses. 
Knowing  full  well  the  race  hatred  with  which  Gandhi, 
willingly  or  not,  had  filled  his  disciples,  and  recalling 
the  fate  of  an  American  in  the  recent  Bombay  riots, 
I  hoped  fervently  that  Mr.  Amballal’s  power  was  as 
great  as  it  was  reputed.  There  was  no  need  to  worry, 
for  everybody  looked  at  me  merely  with  curiosity. 

At  last  we  reached  the  simple  tent  reserved  for  the 
great  leader.  Following  the  old  Indian  custom,  which 
all  obeyed,  we  took  off  our  shoes  before  entering. 
Passing  through  the  outer  room,  we  entered  Gandhi’s 

97 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


own  room,  in  which  there  was  a  spinning  wheel, 
whereon  the  leader  was  used  to  spin  as  an  example 
to  his  followers.  Besides  the  rush  matting,  there 
were  a  pallet  and  two  pillows  on  the  floor,  and  three 
bricks  at  one  side  of  the  room.  This  was  all  the 
furniture. 

Soon  we  heard  the  voice  of  the  crowd  outside  grow 
in  volume,  and  going  to  the  door  we  saw  Gandhi, 
the  saint,  the  seer,  the  reincarnation  of  Vishnu,  drive 
up  in  a  Ford  car!  There  flashed  through  my  mind 
the  memory  of  his  fierce  denunciation  of  machinery, 
and  modern  rapid  locomotion.  In  a  moment,  the  man 
who  had  aroused  India’s  spirit  as  no  man,  dead  or 
alive,  had  ever  done,  stood  before  me,  and  I  was  being 
introduced.  Except  for  a  loin  cloth  and  a  narrow 
scarf,  he  was  naked,  wearing  no  sandals,  no  cap  such 
as  his  disciples  wear.  He  shook  hands,  his  eyes  cast 
down,  and  there  was  an  air  of  humility.  I  noted  that 
he  was  a  small  man,  that  every  rib  plainly  showed, 
and  that  his  whole  physique  was  frail.  When  he 
looked  up  at  me  with  a  tired  but  kindly  smile,  I  saw 
that  he  had  lost  the  two  upper  front  teeth. 

As  he  talked,  I  began  to  understand  why  C.  F. 
Andrews  “loved  him  like  a  brother,”  and  why  the 
proud  Brahman,  S.  Srinavasa  Iyengar,  spoke  of  him 

98 


MAHATMA  GANDHI 


tenderly  as  “my  master.”  I  understood  why  the 
Inspector  of  Police  at  Poona  enjoyed  nothing  more 
than  to  talk  with  him,  though,  as  he  laughingly  added, 
“I  may  have  to  arrest  him  any  day.”  Gandhi’s  eyes 
were  liquid,  filled  with  a  spiritual  light,  and  there  was 
a  mildness,  a  sweetness  of  spirit,  a  compassion  for 
one  who  could  not  see  the  light,  who  could  only  stand 
in  the  outer  darkness  of  the  materialistic  world. 
I  recalled  what  his  friend  Jayakar  had  told  me  of 
Gandhi’s  “selflessness” — a  word  his  admirers  never 
omit — of  his  gentleness,  his  piety  and  religious  fer¬ 
vor.  In  America  he  would  be  merely  a  curiosity. 
The  long-haired  men  and  the  short-haired  women 
would  gather  around  him  and  console  him  because 
nobody  appreciated  him ;  but  in  India,  whose  mystic 
soul  is  stirred  by  nothing  as  by  religion,  millions 
turn  to  him,  swayed,  I  feel  sure,  much  more  by  his 
religious  appeal  than  by  his  political  ideals.  The 
Maharajah  of  Alwar  was  more  than  half  right,  I 
believe,  when  he  assured  me :  “Mr.  Gandhi  is  not  of 
any  influence,  but  Mahatma  Gandhi  is  listened  to 
because  he  is  a  holy  man.”  “If  you  and  Gandhi  and 
I,”  said  His  Highness,  “were  to  go  to  the  gate  of  an 
Indian  village  and  determine  by  lot  which  should  be 
announced  as  a  Mahatma,  it  wouldn’t  make  the  least 

99 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


difference  which  of  us  got  the  title  and  went  in.  To 
the  one  with  that  title  all  would  come,  asking  no 
questions,  but  accepting  whatever  he  said  without 
hesitation.”  It  is  true  that  Gandhi  has  more  than 
once  declared  that  he  is  not  a  Mahatma;  but  his  fol¬ 
lowers  insist  upon  the  title,  and  holy  man  he  will  be 
though  one  should  rise  from  the  dead  and  deny  it. 

Only  by  reviewing  the  political  and  social  ideas  of 
this  new  Messiah  can  one  understand  the  amazing 
miracle  of  his  leadership.  “India,”  he  says,  “is  being 
ground  down,  not  under  the  English  heel  but  under 
that  of  modern  civilization  .  .  .  there  is  no  end  to 
the  victims  destroyed  in  the  fire  of  civilization  .  .  . 
it  is  like  a  mouse  gnawing  while  it  is  soothing  us.” 
Its  railways,  lawyers,  and  doctors,  he  declares,  have 
impoverished  India.  “But  for  the  railways,  the 
English  could  not  have  such  a  hold  on  India  as  they 
have.”  These  railways  have  spread  bubonic  plague, 
he  asserts,  because  they  carry  plague  germs.  “Rail¬ 
ways  increase  the  frequency  of  famines,  because, 
owing  to  facility  of  means  of  locomotion,  people 
sell  out  their  grain  .  .  .  become  careless,  and  so  the 
pressure  of  famine  increases.”  He  forgets  that  it  is 
the  railroad  which  has  enabled  the  Government  so  to 
combat  famine  that,  in  its  worst  aspects,  it  has  practi- 


ioo 


MAHATMA  GANDHI 


cally  disappeared.  He  clinches  his  argument  against 
railways  by  asserting:  “Good  travels  at  a  snail’s 
pace  ...  it  can  therefore  have  little  to  do  with  rail¬ 
ways  .  .  .  but  evil  has  wings.  .  .  .  God  set  a  limit 
to  a  man’s  locomotive  ambition  in  the  construction  of 
his  body.” 

Gandhi  would  banish  the  railroad  and  the  factory. 
He  would  stop  “the  spreading  of  the  hideous  town,” 
and  send  back  to  the  country  the  80  per  cent  of 
Bombay’s  million  inhabitants  who  throng  there  to 
work  in  smoke  and  squalor.  He  would  raise  the 
black  pall  from  the  steel-smelting  city  of  Jamshedpur, 
from  Calcutta  and  Madras.  From  these  sinks  of 
iniquity  he  would  send  them  back  to  the  clean  air 
of  their  native  villages. 

It  is  not  mill  life  alone,  Gandhi  teaches,  but 
lawyers  who  have  “enslaved  India.”  They  will, 
“as  a  rule,  advance  quarrels.  .  .  .  They  have  made 
brothers  enemies.  .  .  .  Lazy  people,  in  order  to  in¬ 
dulge  in  luxuries,  take  up  such  professions.”  If  law 
“pleaders  were  to  abandon  their  profession  and  con¬ 
sider  it  just  as  degrading  as  prostitution,  English  rule 
would  break  up  in  a  day.” 

“They  have  also  used  the  medical  profession,”  he 
declares,  “for  holding  us.”  “Doctors  have  almost 


IOI 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


H  \  l 


tr 


unhinged  us.  Sometimes  I  think  that  quacks  are 
better  than  highly  qualified  doctors. ”  Diseases, 
Gandhi  asserts,  arise  by  our  own  negligence  or  in¬ 
dulgence.  “I  overeat;  I  have  indigestion;  I  go  to 
a  doctor ;  he  gives  me  medicine ;  I  am  cured !  I  over¬ 
eat  again ;  and  I  take  his  pills  again.  Had  the  doctor 
not  intervened,  nature  would  have  done  its  work,  and 
I  would  have  acquired  mastery  over  myself,  would 
have  been  freed  from  vice.” — ‘‘Hospitals  are  insti¬ 
tutions  for  propagating  sin.”  The  Mahatma’s  pure 
reason  is  never  deterred  by  facts.  In  one  passage  of 
Hind  Swaraj ,  Gandhi  bitterly  attacks  vivisection,  and 
one  seems  to  be  listening  to  a  voice  from  the  Middle 
Ages,  or  to  Bryan  denouncing  Darwinism. 

And  what  does  Mr.  Gandhi  conclude  from  all  this? 
“Those  alone  who  have  been  affected  by  western 

civilization  have  become  enslaved.”  Get  rid  of  it, 

■  T 

and  India  is  free.  He  believes  the  old  civilization 
of  India  “is  not  to  be  beaten  in  the  world.  Rome 
went,  Greece  shared  the  same  fate,  the  might 
of  the  Pharaohs  was  broken,  Japan  became  western¬ 
ized  .  .  .  but  India  is  still  sound  at  the  foundation.” 
He  glories  in  the  fact  that  “we  have  managed  with 
the  same  kind  of  plow  that  existed  thousands  of 
years  ago.”  Indeed,  I  can  testify  that,  while  travel- 


h  u  * 


itC  \Jk 


is 


102 


MAHATMA  GANDHI 


ing  five  thousand  miles  in  India,  going  out  frequently 
into  the  country  districts,  I  never  saw  a  modern 
plow,  or  a  reaper  and  binder,  or  a  threshing- 
machine,  or  any  agricultural  implement  not  used  by 
the  sons  of  Abraham  three  thousand  years  ago.  They 
reap  with  a  sickle,  and  thresh  with  a  flail  that  was  old 
when  Methuselah  was  a  child. 

Perhaps  nowhere  else  does  the  ancient  world  sur¬ 
vive  to  the  extent  that  it  does  in  India;  and  if  this 
is  a  virtue,  by  all  means  give  her  the  palm.  Gandhi 
complacently  decides  that  India  “has  nothing  to  learn 
from  anybody  else,  and  this  is  as  it  should  be.  .  .  . 
A  nation  with  a  constitution  like  this  is  fitter  to 
teach  others  than  to  learn  from  others.”  There  is  a 
nationalistic  complacency  in  that  assertion  which  it 
would  be  hard  to  match.  “Wherever  in  India  the 
curse  of  modern  civilization  has  not  reached  (he  has 
in  mind  the  backward  districts,  as  travelers  describe 
them)  India  is  as  it  was  before,  and  is  happy  and 
free.”  All  Indians,  by  going  back  to  the  simple  life, 
using  the  charka,  or  spinning  wheel,  to  make  their 
own  simple  Khaddar  cloth,  giving  up  machines  and 
English  luxuries,  may  be  free.  “It  is  swaraj  (self- 
rule)  when  we  learn  to  rule  ourselves.”  Only  “our 
adoption  of  their  civilization  makes  the  British 

103 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


presence  in  India  at  all  possible.  Your  hatred  against 
them,”  Gandhi  counsels  his  followers,  “ought  to  be 
transferred  to  their  civilization.”  When  Indians 
wish  to  resort  to  warfare,  he  asks  them  gently,  “Do 
you  want  to  make  the  holy  land  of  India  unholy? 
To  arm  India  on  a  large  scale  is  to  Europeanize  it. 
Do  you  not  tremble  to  think  of  freeing  India  by 
assassination?  What  we  need  to  do  is  to  kill  our¬ 
selves.  It  is  a  cowardly  thought,  that  of  killing 
others.  Those  who  are  intoxicated  by  the  wretched 
modern  civilization  think  these  things.”  Some  of 
the  more  belligerent  Indian  agitators  assured  me  that 
Gandhi  was  too  saintly  to  lead  a  movement  “against 
a  gang  of  toughs  like  the  British  imperialists,”  but 
up  to  the  day  of  his  arrest  he  was  doing  marvelously 
well  at  it. 

His  idea  simply  to  use  “love-force,”  “soul-force,” 
or  passive  resistance,  was  sure  to  appeal  to  an 
Oriental.  A  governor  of  a  great  province  described 
to  me  how  thirty  thousand  Indians  in  his  capital  city 
lay  down  on  the  street-railway  track  and  stopped  all 
traffic  for  two  days.  In  desperation  he  at  last  ordered 
the  chief  of  police  to  bring  a  company  of  dragoons 
into  the  city,  select  a  place  where  the  horsemen  could 
be  seen  coming  for  several  blocks,  and  then  order  to 

104 


MAHATMA  GANDHI 


charge  with  lowered  spears  and  come  thundering 
down  upon  the  prostrate  Indian.  He  sat,  in  an  agony 
of  suspense,  until  word  came  by  telephone  that  the 
passive  resisters  had  broken  and  fled,  clearing  miles 
of  track. 

When  Gandhi  was  asked  how  he  would  meet  the 
wild  Afghans  if  they  were  to  swoop  down  out  of 
the  Northwest  hills,  to  ravage  India,  when  the  British 
had  left,  he  answered  that  he  would  meet  them  with 
“soul-force.”  That  idea  that  the  East  can  bow  low, 
“let  the  legion  thunder  past,  and  plunge  in  thought 
again”  is  a  beautiful  idea,  but  its  consequences  would 
be  hard  on  those  who  own  anything  beyond  a  charka, 
a  straw  pallet  and  a  loin  cloth. 

Police  Inspector  Griffith  was  discussing  with 
Gandhi  the  punishment  of  criminals,  which  the  re¬ 
former  thought  was  all  wrong.  “What  would  you 
do?”  asked  the  Inspector. 

“I  would  punish  them  as  I  did  my  daughter  when 
she  told  me  a  lie:  I  fasted  for  a  fortnight.” 

“But,”  said  the  Inspector,  “if  you  fast  a  fortnight 
for  a  lie,  how  long  must  I  fast  for  a  murderer? 
Besides,  there  are  fifty-four  murders  a  year  in  this 
city.  When  would  I  get  a  chance  to  eat?” 

“Oh !  now  you’re  unreasonable  and  I  can’t  argue 
with  you,”  replied  Gandhi. 

105 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


He  would,  therefore,  resist  evil  by  deliberate  self¬ 
suffering,  not  deliberate  injuring  of  the  wrongdoer. 

His  mind  has  an  elusive  character  often  found 
among  Indians.  Miss  Tarbell  once  told  me  of  a  wit¬ 
ness  before  a  congressional  committee  who  seemed 
at  times  to  stand  on  a  dizzy  edge  of  a  precipice, 
and  you  were  sure  he  was  lost,  when  he  “suddenly 
stepped  over  and  walked  down  and  came  up  smiling.” 
So  with  Gandhi  in  one  of  his  famous  interviews  with 
the  Viceroy.  The  Mahatma  had  argued  against  re¬ 
pressive  measures,  and  urged  “soul-force.”  “Can 
you  tell  me,”  queried  Lord  Reading,  “any  example 
in  history  when  government  has  successfully  used 
soul-force?” 

After  just  a  moment’s  hesitation,  Gandhi  replied: 
“Ah!  Your  Excellency,  but  this  is  a  new  dispensa¬ 
tion.”  Reason  totters  on  its  high  throne  when  it 
has  grasped  at  substance  and  finds  only  airy  nothing. 

Yet  this  “Grand  Old  Fanatic,”  as  one  of  his  deep¬ 
est  admirers  dubbed  him  to  me,  had  a  good  English 
education,  first  in  India,  then  in  London  University, 
and  finally  by  completing  his  studies  for  the  bar  in 
the  Inner  Temple.  He  speaks  excellent  English  in  a 
most  eloquent  way,  though  he  is  not  at  all  oratorical, 
and  is  more  likely  to  scold  his  audience  than  to  tickle 

106 


MAHATMA  GANDHI 


its  vanities.  With  all  his  maddening  unreason  there 
is  about  him  something  fundamentally  right-minded. 
His  idea  that  “the  soul’s  wealth  is  the  only  wealth” 
is  a  truth  sung  by  a  poet  of  ancient  Greece. 
He  is  quite  right  that  Indians  cannot  win  swaraj  by 
force.  He  is  right  in  urging  Brahmans  to  sit  at  the 
table  with  “untouchables,”  and  thus  rid  caste  of 
one  af  its  worst  features.  He  has  attacked  fearlessly 
some  of  the  worst  evils  of  Hinduism.  Whatever  one 
may  think  of  Non-cooperation  and  its  danger,  it  has 
done  much  that  Gandhi’s  admirers  claim  for  it.  He 
has  made  the  Indian  people  feel  their  unity  as  never 
before.  He  has  awakened  Indians  from  two  hun¬ 
dred  years  of  dreaming  “in  slavery” — as  agitators 
love  to  call  the  British  late  benevolent  absolutism — to 
a  pride  that  will  not  tolerate  assumed  superiority. 
Indeed,  many  believe  that  he  has  lighted  a  fire  in 
India  that  shall  never  be  put  out. 

On  the  other  hand,  Gandhi  has  made  wild  promises 
of  swaraj  “next  month,”  or  “within  a  year,”  and 
passed  blandly  over  failure  that  would  have  ruined 
most  men.  His  will  is  tireless,  and  he  is  most  fertile 
in  resources.  First  he  set  out  to  capture  the  educated 
classes.  He  tried  for  the  taxpayer,  the  lawyer,  who 
was  to  give  up  practice,  the  title  holder,  who  was  to 

io  7 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


drop  his  “Sir”  and  “Lord,”  the  university  student, 
who  was  to  leave  college.  He  failed  ultimately  with 
each,  because  they  could  not  endure  the  economic 
loss,  and  they  deserted  after  feeble  trials.  He  then 
preached  that  Non-cooperation  meant  campaigns 
against  drink,  “untouchability,”  and  the  use  of  for¬ 
eign  cloths.  He  urged  the  use  of  the  spinning  wheel 
to  supply  home-spun  cloth,  and  to  develop  “soul- 
force.”  With  these  vagaries  he  captured  the  masses. 
Then  his  non-violence,  non-cooperation  and  civil  dis¬ 
obedience  degenerated  into  violence  at  Malegaon,  in 
Malabar,  Bombay,  Calcutta,  Madras,  and  Chauri 
Chaura.  He  suddenly  called  on  all  disciples  to  desist 
until  they  developed  the  soul- force  to  go  on  peace¬ 
ably.  His  grief  was  great,  and,  I  believe,  genuine, 
over  the  failure  of  his  followers  to  attain  his  spiritual 
heights.  But  meanwhile  the  sands  were  running  out, 
and  government,  with  its  obligation  first  of  all  to 
preserve  public  order,  could  not  go  on  forever  ignor¬ 
ing  Gandhi,  whose  peaceful  teachings  were  in  fact 
driving  the  tide  of  race  hatred  ever  higher.  Even 
those  officials  who  would  admit  that  Gandhi  had 
exalted  the  Indian  people,  saw  clearly  that  he  also 
endangered  the  safety  of  the  state. 

When,  as  I  was  leaving  India,  I  heard  of  Gandhi’s 

108 


MAHATMA  GANDHI 


arrest,  and  later,  on  shipboard  in  the  China  Sea, 
learned  that  he  had  been  convicted  and  sent  to  prison 
for  six  years,  I  found  that  I  had  mingled  feelings 
about  it.  I  thought  of  Gandhi’s  gentleness,  his  lov¬ 
ableness,  the  atmosphere  of  saintliness  about  him,  the 
frail  body  always  overtaxed  and  ever  driven  on  by  a 
high  sense  of  duty.  I  recalled  him — simple,  unde¬ 
filed,  living  in  the  pure  radiance  of  the  spirit.  These 
thoughts  made  me  sad.  But  when  I  reasoned  about 
it,  I  knew  that,  had  I  been  Viceroy,  I  should  have 
arrested  Gandhi  six  months  earlier!  I  never  could 
have  had  Lord  Reading’s  patience  nor  the  courage 
to  face  the  criticism  of  those  who  gnashed  their  teeth 
at  his  delays.  One  of  the  first  things  Lord  Reading 
did  when  he  set  his  vice-regal  course  was  to  hold 
several  interviews  with  Gandhi,  to  the  great  wrath 
of  reactionary  officialdom.  He  wished  to  under¬ 
stand  his  aims  and  meet  them  if  he  could.  It  came 
to  nothing,  but  one  must  honor  him  for  the  gener¬ 
osity  and  good  will.  I  have  only  admiration  for  the 
wisdom  and  patience  of  the  Viceroy,  a  liberal  man, 
a  strong,  calm,  and  reasonable  man,  who  wished 
nothing  so  much  as  to  do  right.  His  brain  power  is 
much  superior  to  most  of  those  about  him,  and  he 
is  master  in  his  own  house.  Though  keen  in  his 

109 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


intuitions,  he  is  cautious  in  action.  His  critics  say 
that  he  lacks  firmness.  When  I  saw  him  he  was 
acting  from  day  to  day  as  the  hour  seemed  to  de¬ 
mand,  but  waiting  for  a  policy.  He  had  two  firm 
convictions :  one,  that  civilized  society  rests  on  re¬ 
spect  for  law — that  was  Gandhi’s  Nemesis;  the 
other,  that  legal  considerations  ought  not  always 
to  be  uppermost  in  a  statesman’s  mind — that  was 
Gandhi’s  hope.  Gandhi’s  persistence  in  civil  dis¬ 
obedience  compelled  the  Viceroy  to  act  on  his  first 
conviction. 

I  asked  Sir  Narayan  Chandavarkar,  President  of 
the  Bombay  Legislative  Council,  and  loyal  supporter 
of  the  British  Government,  why  it  was  that  I  could 
detect  in  him  and  other  Indians,  who  bitterly  criti¬ 
cized  Gandhi’s  methods,  an  underlying  reverence  for 
the  man.  “It  is,”  he  replied,  “the  religious  appeal, 
the  strongest  of  all  emotions  in  an  Indian.  I,  who 
gave  up  my  Brahman  prerogatives  that  I  might  fight 
the  battle  for  the  depressed  classes,  and  who  have  a 
reasoned  hatred  of  idols,  have  felt  the  religious  emo¬ 
tions  well  up  within  me  when,  even  lately,  I  have 
entered  a  Hindu  temple  and  looked  upon  the  stone 
idols.  Millions  of  Indians  believe  Gandhi  to  be  a 
reincarnation  of  Vishnu.”  “He  will  become  a  god,” 


no 


MAHATMA  GANDHI 


they  declare.  There  are  in  India  many  ascetics  like 
Gandhi  who  give  up  the  flesh,  alcohol  and  women, 
who  fast,  devote  themselves  to  good  works,  and 
whose  abiding  place  becomes  a  center  of  pilgrimage 
to  which  thousands  come  bringing  gifts.  Usually 
these  holy  men  use  the  gifts  for  various  charitable 
institutions  or  religious  purposes,  but,  said  Sir 
Narayan,  Gandhi  uses  his  reputation  for  sanctity  to 
accomplish  political  ends.  Gandhi,  himself,  has  said, 
“I,  who  wear  the  guise  of  a  politician,  am  at  heart  a 
religious  man.” 

It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  for  the  masses 
Gandhi  is  not  merely  what  his  own  words  and  con¬ 
duct  would  make  him,  but  what  his  followers,  good 
and  bad,  have  caused  the  most  credulous  and  super¬ 
stitious  people  in  the  world  to  believe  him  to  be. 

It  is  true  that  wherever  he  goes,  men  come,  as  to 
a  shrine,  by  tens  of  thousands,  and  listen  as  to  a 
prophet ;  but  that  means  little  among  three  hundred- 
odd  millions  of  people.  A  most  active  extremist 
organization  exploits  this  holy  figure  as  its  greatest 
asset.  One  finds  Gandhi’s  pictures  for  sale  in  every 
bazaar  in  India,  often  drawn  in  the  midst  of  other 
sacred  figures  suggesting  his  close  relation  with  the 
Hindu  gods.  It  has  been  carried  in  chariots  in 


hi 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


the  sacred  processions  so  loved  by  the  Hindu.  Simple 
village  folk,  I  have  been  told  repeatedly  on  the  best 
authority,  pray  to  these  pictures.  They  find  the 
leaves  of  trees  stamped  with  the  Mahatma’s  name; 
and  the  cunning  charlatan  who  did  it  sells  the  leaves 
to  awe-struck  worshipers.  Ignorant  peasants  are 
told  that,  if  they  do  not  heed  Gandhi’s  commands, 
they  will  be  turned  to  stone.  They  are  promised  that, 
when  the  Gandhi  raj  (rule)  comes,  they  will  have  no 
land  tax  to  pay,  no  famine  or  scourge  will  appear  in 
the  land,  and  the  golden  age  will  come.  An  unprinci¬ 
pled  device  to  which  Mrs.  Annie  Besant  called  my 
attention  was  that  of  sending  a  message  in  Mahatma 
Gandhi’s  name  to  the  heads  of  the  caste  panchayats, 
or  governing  bodies,  inducing  them  to  threaten  with 
caste  excommunication  any  members  who  should  do 
any  work  on  a  day  for  which  a  hartal  had  been 
proclaimed.  This  use  of  caste  tyranny  was  very 
effective. 

The  Mahatma  himself  frowns  on  all  this;  but, 
fearful  of  injury  to  the  whole  cause,  he  finds  it  hard 
to  control  the  fringe  of  cranks  and  unprincipled 
rogues  that  follow  any  great  movement.  In  America 
before  the  Civil  War  the  great  abolitionists  found 
that  their  worst  trial  was  the  freak  reformers,  the 


II 2 


MAHATMA  GANDHI 


free-love  advocates,  the  wild-eyed,  vision-seeing 
people  who  joined  the  great  movement  to  free  the 
slaves.  Gandhi  finds  consolation  in  his  nobler  fol¬ 
lowers,  like  Mr.  Jayaker  of  Bombay,  who,  though  a 
graduate  of  Oxford,  rich  and  influential,  dresses  in 
swadeshi  cloth  and  thrusts  his  bare  feet  into  Indian 
slippers.  I  recall  him,  gentle  as  a  dove,  soft-spoken, 
with  a  mild,  sad  face,  and  a  soul  that  glowed  with 
enthusiasm  over  Hindu  philosophy,  Hindu  art, 
Hindu  literature.  His  culture  and  refinement,  his 
gentleness  and  sweetness  of  nature,  were  all  devoted 
to  admiration  of  Gandhi.  He  has  recently  turned 
away  from  the  cause  of  Non-cooperation,  but  I  doubt 
not  that  he  loves  and  still  speaks  reverently  of 
Gandhi.  So,  too,  S.  Srinavasa  Iyengar,  who  admit¬ 
ted  to  me  that,  at  first,  he  had  opposed  Gandhi’s 
Non-cooperation,  but  that,  at  last,  he  had  “seen  the 
light,”  and  was  “filled  with  a  strange  happiness” 
when  he  realized  that  its  value  was,  not  the  trouble 
which  the  Non-cooperators  gave  the  British  Govern¬ 
ment,  but  the  unity  and  self-control  which  they 
acquired  for  Indians.  “We  gain  swaraj  day  by  day,” 
he  assured  me  with  ecstasy,  “as  we  conquer  ourselves 
and  go  to  prison  or  give  up  luxuries  or  offices  for 
the  cause.  .  .  .  We  don’t  hate  the  English,”  he  de- 

113 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


dared,  true  to  his  master’s  teaching,  “we  serenely 
ignore  him.” 

Rabindranath  Tagore  admires  Gandhi,  too,  though 
he  does  not  agree  with  all  his  plans  or  doctrines.  He 
wrote,  “Mahatma  Gandhi  came  and  stood  at  the  cot¬ 
tage  door  of  the  destitute  millions,  clad  as  one  of 
themselves,  and  talking  to  them  in  their  own  lan¬ 
guage.  .  .  .  Who  else  has  felt  so  many  men  of  India 
to  be  his  own  flesh  and  blood?  ...  as  soon  as  true 
love  stood  at  India’s  door,  it  flew  open;  all  hesitation 
and  holding  back  vanished.  Truth  awakened  truth.” 
But,  alas,  it  also  awakened  race  hatred,  and  Govern¬ 
ment,  merely  to  preserve  its  existence,  was  obliged 
to  take  vigorous  though  humane  measures  to  pre¬ 
serve  public  order.  These  Gandhi  chose  to  call 
“repressive  measures.” 


VI 


“NON-VIOLENT  NON-COOPERATION” 

It  is  important  to  know  what  “non-violent  non- 
cooperation”  really  meant  in  India  from  1919  well 
into  1922  before  one  passes  upon  the  wisdom  of  the 
use  by  the  Indian  Government  of  what  the  Gandhists 
and  the  Nationalists  called  repressive  measures. 
There  is  little  doubt  in  my  own  mind  that  Gandhi  in 
the  fog  of  his  mystic  idealism  truly  thought  that  he 
could  arouse  mad  resentment  of  the  “Satanic  govern¬ 
ment”  and  hate,  in  effect  at  least,  of  Western  civiliza¬ 
tion,  and  still  keep  his  followers  non-violent.  But 
it  was  against  human  nature.  As  one  reads  the 
newspapers  of  those  troubled  years,  or  the  official 
accounts  submitted  to  the  Legislative  Assembly  and 
accepted  by  the  Indian  representatives  as  substan¬ 
tially  true,  one  is  struck  with  the  way  non-violent 
beginnings  drifted  quickly  to  violent  ends.  In  Fyza- 
bad  district  a  Non-cooperator  had  stirred  up  agrarian 
riots.  ITe  was  arrested,  and  a  crowd  of  sympathetic 
Indians  tried  to  hold  up  a  train  and  rescue  him  from 
the  officers.  Hard-pressed,  they  fired  and  wounded 

115 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


one  rioter.  Again  at  Aligarh,  a  political  agitator  was 
sentenced  to  prison ;  a  mob  attacked  the  police  guards, 
and  the  result  was  two  killed,  several  wounded,  and 
a  post  office  and  other  buildings  burned.  At  Giridih  a 
judge  remanded  a  Non-cooperator  to  jail,  a  mob 
swarmed  about  the  jail  to  prevent  the  police  from 
doing  their  duty.  The  police  took  shelter  there,  and 
the  mob  attacked  with  a  casualty  resulting.  At 
Malegaon  men  were  prosecuted  for  carrying  arms  at 
a  mass  meeting.  A  mob  attacked  police,  killed  a  sub¬ 
inspector  and  a  constable,  did  some  looting,  and  in 
quelling  them  three  were  killed,  nine  wounded.  A 
little  later  Khilafat  volunteers  were  imprisoned,  the 
mob  determined  to  make  a  clean  sweep  of  the  police, 
and  in  the  riot  one  magistrate  was  beaten  to  death, 
his  body  burned,  and  four  constables  killed.  Only 
the  arrival  of  troops  stopped  the  bloody  work.  These 
are  only  a  few  of  the  cases  which  occurred  before  the 
famous  Moplah  rebellion  broke  out  in  the  Malabar 
region.  Government  naturally  grew  rather  “jumpy” 
and  doubtful  of  the  wisdom  of  giving  agitators  free 
reign  while  they  stirred  men  up  to  madness. 

Meanwhile  Gandhi  had  grown  somewhat  restless 
under  the  apparent  failure  of  his  efforts  to  get 
students  to  leave  Government  schools,  lawyers  to 

116 


“NON-VIOLENT  NON-COOPERATION” 


surrender  their  practice,  and  titleholders  to  give  up 
their  titles.  Losing  faith  in  the  intellectuals,  he 
turned  to  the  masses,  urging  them  to  cease  to  use 
foreign  cloth,  to  spin  and  weave  their  own  simple 
khciddar,  and  to  picket  the  shops  of  cloth  merchants 
urging  prospective  buyers  to  turn  away.  Gandhi 
exhorted  his  followers,  “There  is  nothing  more  to 
be  done  but  to  spin  and  court  imprisonment,  and  spin 
even  in  the  prisons  if  they  will  let  us.  Whilst  we  are 
spinning  or  going  to  jail  we  must  retain  the  correct 
attitude  of  mind,  that  is,  of  non-violence  and  friend¬ 
liness  between  the  various  faiths.  If  we  cease  to  hate 
Englishmen,  cooperators,  and  those  who  do  not  see 
eye  to  eye  with  us;  if  we  cease  to  distrust  or  fear  one 
another,  and  if  we  are  determined  to  suffer  and  work 
for  the  bread  of  the  whole  nation,  that  is,  spin,  do  we 
not  see  that  no  power  on  earth  can  withstand  us? 

At  a  tea  party  given  to  me  in  Calcutta,  where 
gathered  some  thirty  Indians  who  had  at  some  time 
studied  in  American  Universities,  the  whole  affair 
turned  into  an  indignation  meeting  against  the 
British  Government.  An  old  doctor  in  a  quaint 
Bengal  dress  harangued  me  on  the  ills  of  that  regime, 
while  Mrs.  Das,  a  charming  woman,  dressed  in  a 
beautifully  ornamented  khaddar  sari ,  plied  me  with 

ii  7 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


tea  and  betel  nut,  assuring  me  all  the  time  that  the 
old  doctor  spoke  only  the  truth.  Whenever  he  could 
get  an  opening  a  wild-eyed  young  Bengalee  in  a 
Gandhi  cap  held  a  curious  diagram  up  before  me,  and 
demonstrated  with  geometrical  figures  how  the  magic 
spinning  wheel  would  evolve  social  force,  and  finally 
give  swaraj  to  India. 

To  deprive  the  Indian  Government  of  the  revenue 
from  drink  shops,  these,  too,  under  Gandhi’s  plan, 
were  to  be  picketed  and  all  patrons  turned  away.  The 
picketing  naturally  led  to  disturbances,  fights,  even 
riots  in  some  cases,  and  when  Government  began  to 
arrest  the  picketers,  Gandhi  pleaded  with  the  Indian 
youths  to  become  volunteers  for  imprisonment.  I 
saw  them  parading  the  streets  in  groups  of  fifteen  or 
twenty  with  garlands  about  their  necks  like  sacrificial 
victims.  They  had  pledged  themselves  at  the  Indian 
Congress  headquarters  to  seek  imprisonment.  Gandhi 
urged  them  in  his  eloquent  way,  “We  must  widen  the 
gates  of  prisons  and  we  must  enter  them  as  a  bride¬ 
groom  enters  the  bride’s  chamber.  Freedom  is  to  be 
wooed  only  inside  prison  walls  and  sometimes  on  the 
gallows,  never  in  the  council  chambers,  courts  or 
the  schoolroom.  Freedom  is  the  most  capricious  jilt 
ever  known  to  the  world.  She  is  the  greatest  temp- 

118 


'‘NON-VIOLENT  NON-COOPERATION’’ 


tress,  most  difficult  to  please.  No  wonder  she  builds 
her  temples  in  jails  or  on  inaccessible  heights  and 
laughs  at  us  as  we  attempt  to  scale  the  prison  wall 
or  (in  the  hope  of  reaching  her  temple  on  some  Hima¬ 
layan  height)  wade  through  hills  and  dales  strewn 
with  thorns.”  With  contagious  enthusiasm  he  cried, 
“I  should  certainly  have  loved  to  travel  to  Allahabad 
to  see  Pandit  Motilal  Nehru  and  his  son  being  hand¬ 
cuffed  together  and  made  to  walk  to  their  destination. 
I  would  have  loved  to  watch  the  radiant  smiles  on 
their  faces  in  the  consciousness  of  their  handcuffs 
hastening  the  advent  of  swaraj.”  He  published  im¬ 
posing  lists  of  leaders  who  were  in  jail.  Volunteers 
were  to  gather  as  picketers  and  sing  the  national 
song  of  Bande  Mataram  (hail  to  thee,  oh  Mother 
India!).  They  soon  added  the  cheer  “Mahatma 
Gandhi  ki  jai.”  These  volunteers,  in  batches  of  a 
dozen  each,  some  hired  at  a  rupee  a  day,  made  the 
rounds  of  their  city,  singing  patriotic  songs,  wearing 
badges  on  their  arms,  and,  in  the  midst  of  gathering 
crowds,  reading  speeches  written  by  the  most  suc¬ 
cessful  mob  orators.  All  this,  of  course,  stirred  the 
easily  excited  Indians  into  a  frenzy  of  political 
excitement.  It  was  all  very  beautiful  for  Gandhi  to 
urge  the  Indian  people  to  “keep  their  heads  cool  and 

119 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


their  hands  on  the  spinning  wheel,”  but  what  seemed 
much  more  likely  was  “anarchy”  and  the  “rivers  of 
blood  and  mountains  of  corpses”  which  Gandhi 
admitted  at  one  time  that  he  could  see  with 
equanimity. 

On  the  other  hand,  I  myself  saw  how  harmless 
the  results  of  the  Gandhi  movement  could  be  in  some 
of  the  country  districts.  With  Mr.  Emerson,  the 
Commissioner,  and  Mr.  Lindsay,  the  Collector,  in 
the  Dacca  district  in  Bengal,  I  had  gone  up  the  river 
to  Shekhanagar  to  see  a  session  of  the  Union  Board, 
a  local  Government  institution  set  up  by  the  British 
in  Bengal.  As  we  neared  the  little  town  we  saw  over 
a  hundred  followers  of  Gandhi  gathered  from  the 
surrounding  villages  waiting  for  us  near  the  landing- 
place.  All  wore  Gandhi  caps,  and  as  they  marched 
sang  “Bande  Mataram”  or  shouted:  “Mahatma 
Gandhi,  ki  jai !”  They  had  learned  from  a  radical 
Calcutta  paper  that  I  was  coming,  and  had  been  given 
a  wildly  exaggerated  idea  of  my  importance.  As  we 
landed  they  pressed  about  us,  and  one  who  spoke 
English  urged  me  to  leave  these  bureaucrats  who 
would  give  me  “all  wrong  ideas,”  and  come  with 
them  to  the  “All-Indian”  headquarters,  where  they 
■yyould  tell  me  the  real  truth  about  India.  When  I  ex- 


120 


“NON-VIOLENT  NON-COOPERATION” 


plained  that  I  had  talked  with  Gandhi,  and  Das,  and 
Malaviya,  they  admitted  that  I  might  have  heard  the 
truth,  and  were  content  with  merely  giving  me  a 
carefully  written  address  prepared  in  advance.  A 
few  passages  from  this  address  will  help  to  convey 
the  point  of  view  of  the  poor,  unsophisticated  Indian, 
as  well  as  to  show  some  real  Babu  English.  The 
charges  against  the  British  Government  were  the 
same  I  had  repeatedly  heard  in  the  radical  Indian 
headquarters  everywhere. 


“Sir,”  it  began,  “we  the  inhabitants  of  this  and  the 
neighboring  villages,  representing  but  a  small  part  of 
this  historic  Bikrampur,  at  one  time  the  seat  of  valour 
and  culture,  consider  ourselves  very  fortunate  to 
honour  and  welcome  a  man  like  you,  hailing  from  a 
country  of  liberally  enlightened  people.  .  .  .  We 
venture  to  hope  that  our  poor  offerings  of  songs  and 
good  wishes  for  your  health  and  happiness  will  be 
accepted  as  tokens  of  genuine  and  heartfelt  feelings 
of  a  people  who  are  now  physically  and  politically 
poor  and  fallen  from  the  high  ideal  with  which  you 
are  familiar.  You  have  come  from  the  country 
which  has  always  been  in  sympathy  with  a  fallen  and 
downtrodden  people.  It  is  quite  worthy  of  you  and 
the  great  traditions  of  your  country  that  you  have 
come  all  this  inconceivable  distance  at  a  great  sacrifice 


121 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


of  money  and  personal  comfort  with  a  view  to  study¬ 
ing  the  political  condition  of  a  country  which  was 
once  great  and  glorious  amongst  the  nations  of  the 
earth,  but  now  fallen,  nay,  cast  away  from  that  high 
pedestal  of  its  pristine  glory.  .  .  .  The  British 
Government  seems  to  be  quite  apathetic  and  almost 
unsympathetic  with  the  wants  and  aspirations  of  the 
people  of  this  vast  country.  The  great  engine  of 
oppression  set  in  motion  by  the  Government  is  alien¬ 
ating  the  minds  of  all  right-thinking  men  of  this 
country.  The  Government  has  set  the  ball  of  repres¬ 
sion  a-rolling  and  men  like  Ali  brothers,  Motilal 
Nehru,  Lala  Lajpat-Roy  and  C.  R.  Das  and  their 
worthy  companions  are  rotting  in  jail  to  satisfy  the 
whims  and  caprices  of  the  bureaucratic  government. 
Illegal  and  unlawful  things  which  are  being  done  in 
the  name  of  law,  order  and  justice  are  really  under¬ 
mining  the  love  and  sympathy  of  the  loyal  and  law- 
abiding  people.  ...  You  have  come  to  visit  a 
country  where  people  are  deprived  of  their  birthright 
of  free  thought,  free  speech  and  free  movement,  and 
where  public  meetings  are  dispersed  by  regulation 
‘Lathies’  (staves).  You  have  come  to  visit  a 
country  where  the  political  prisoners  are  treated  as 
felons  and  are  kept  with  an  apology  of  food  or  some¬ 
times  without  it,  and  medical  aids  are  denied  when 
they  fall  ill.  ...  You  have  come  to  visit  a  country 
where  the  entire  people  depend  on  Lancashire  to 
clothe  their  nudity  and  on  Liverpool  to  season  their 

1 22 


“NON-VIOLENT  NON-COOPERATION” 


poor  pottage  of  herbs.  You  have  come  to  visit  a 
country  where  the  revenue  derived  is  spent  like  water 
on  military  projects  and  schemes  of  fortifying  the 
frontier  and  not  on  curtailing  the  heavy  death-roll 
from  preventive  diseases  by  improved  sanitation. 
You  have  come  to  visit  a  country  where  high  educa¬ 
tion  is  imparted  to  inculcate  slave  mentality,  and 
where  mass  is  forbidden  to  taste  the  fruit  of 
knowledge  so  that  they  may  live  in  perennial  peace  of 
ignorance  and  Cimmerian  darkness,  where  trade  in 
indigenous  articles  is  discouraged,  where  wearing 
khaddar  (a  kind  of  country-made  cloth)  is  looked 
upon  as  a  crime,  where  arts  are  never  fostered,  where 
taxation  is  very  high  and  millions  go  without  a  full 
meal  a  day  from  year’s  end  to  year’s  end,  and  where 
famine  is  an  annual  visitant  and  people  die  of  starva¬ 
tion  unnoticed  and  uncared  for.  You  have  come  to 
visit  a  country  where  the  proud  descendants  of 
Grandvile  Sharp  and  Welber force  have  forged  in  a 
refined  form  the  shackles  of  slavery  in  the  shape  of 
forced  and  indentured  labour;  and  where  abound 
strange  stories  of  Nemesis  like  black-deer  shooting 
and  entering  the  sanctum  of  the  black  indentured 
labours  to  bestow  the  python  kisses  on  the  lips  of  the 
youthful  Hebes.  .  .  .  You  have  come  to  a  country 
where  the  political  offenders  are  tried  in  camera 
without  allowing  access  to  the  public  or  the  press — 
where  deportation  without  even  an  apology  of  trial 
is  unblushingly  resorted  to,  to  nip  the  awakening  love 

123 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


of  country  in  the  bud — where  the  people  who  con¬ 
sider  the  Habeas  Corpus  their  birthright  allow  the 
arrest  and  detention  of  the  offenders  without  any 
evidence  of  their  guilt  and  allow  the  police  subse¬ 
quently  to  gather  proofs  to  suit  the  exigencies  of 
each  case.  You  have  come  to  a  country  where  justice 
is  administered  with  bitterness  of  race  feeling  and 
where  theory  of  equality  in  the  eye  of  the  law  is 
ruthlessly  ignored,  where  the  Executive  and  Judicial 
functions  are  kept  combined  in  the  same  person  with 
a  view  to  uphold  prestige  and  authority  of  the  rulers. 
Lastly,  let  us  add  here  that  ours  is  an  attempt  which 
is  directed  against  the  present  system  of  Bureaucratic 
government  and  not  against  the  British  rule.  We 
should  rather  be  happy  and  glad  to  find  us  under  the 
British  Commonwealth  with  independent  representa¬ 
tives  of  our  own. 

In  conclusion  permit  us  to  thank  you  once  more 
for  lending  a  patient  ear  to  the  tale  of  some  of  our 
manifold  grievances  and  also  to  convey  our  heartfelt 
thanks,  nay,  feelings  of  gratitude  to  the  great  people 
who  have  the  kindness  to  send  you  to  this  country  to 
see  with  your  own  eyes  and  learn  the  political  con¬ 
ditions  under  which  the  wretched  people  of  this 
country  shift  to  live.  We  venture  to  hope  that  the 
great,  large-hearted  people  of  your  country  who  have 
liberated  the  Filipinos  and  who  have  always  proved 
themselves  friends  of  the  weak  and  the  oppressed  will 
not  deny  a  helping  hand  in  the  just,  righteous  struggle 

124 


“NON-VIOLENT  NON-COOPERATION” 


for  political  emancipation  of  an  ancient  nation,  who 
brought  about  the  dawn  of  Civilization  on  this  dark 
and  dismal  earth.  We  remain,  Sir,  Yours  faithfully, 
The  inhabitants  of  Shekhanagar,  Hashara, 
Solaghar  and  the  adjoining  villages 
(Bikrampur,  Dacca).” 

After  I  had  accepted  the  address,  the  mob  of 
Gandhi  followers  trooped  along  after  us,  and  curi¬ 
ously  peeped  in  the  doors  and  windows,  when  we 
visited  the  Union  Board,  the  Government  Dispen¬ 
sary,  and  the  village  school.  Along  the  whole  route 
they  had  placed  rough  little  placards  tacked  upon 
trees  or  stuck  upon  sticks  in  the  ground,  on  which 
were  written  words  or  slogans  of  the  Non-coopera¬ 
tors.  Some  had  the  simple  word,  SWARAJ ,  others 
said  “Swaraj  is  a  precious  jewel  for  which  the  blood 
of  India  must  be  shed”;  another  had  a  quaint  little 
sketch  of  Gandhi,  while  underneath  was  inscribed, 
“Stand  as  a  National  Volunteer  to  guard  the  prestige 
of  your  Mother  Country.”  When  we  had  done,  they 
marched  with  us  to  the  river,  and  having  given  us 
a  rousing  “Van  Tyne  ki  jai!”  as  if  I  were  some 
sort  of  savior  of  their  country,  permitted  us  to  depart 
in  peace.  As  we  would  have  been  quite  helpless  in 
their  hands  had  they  been  violent,  I  was  very  thank- 

125 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


ful  for  Gandhi’s  success  as  a  preacher  of  non-vio¬ 
lence,  at  least  in  Shekhanagar. 

When  the  visit  of  the  Prince  of  Wales  was  pro¬ 
claimed,  Gandhi  urged  all  of  his  followers  to  let 
nothing  happen  to  the  Prince.  “He  is  our  guest. 
Protect  him  with  your  lives,”  he  exhorted  the 
Indians,  “but,”  he  pleaded,  “let  none  go  to  see  the 
parades  and  ceremonies  in  his  honor.  There  should 
be  hartals  wherever  he  goes.”  By  a  hartal  he  meant 
a  practical  cessation  of  the  economic  and  social  life  of 
the  community.  All  shops  and  houses  should  be 
closed  and  every  one  should  remain  indoors.  “Do 
not  cooperate  with  the  British  in  doing  honor  to  the 
Prince,”  Gandhi  ordered.  Then  came  the  riot  at 
Bombay,  the  deaths  of  fifty-four  and  the  wounding 
of  many,  due  to  a  clash  between  those  who  obeyed 
Gandhi,  who  gave  the  hour  of  the  Prince’s  triumphal 
procession  to  burning  foreign-made  cloth,  and  those 
who  could  not  resist  the  lure  of  a  thrilling  pageant. 
As  is  characteristic  in  India,  the  mob  returning  from 
a  political  meeting  did  the  mischief.  In  general  it 
was  a  fight  between  Hindus  and  Mussulmans  on  one 
side  and  Parsis  on  the  other,  the  police  trying  to 
quell  the  riot  with  as  little  bloodshed  as  possible.  It 
was  chiefly  Indians  who  were  killed,  though  the  life 

126 


“NON-VIOLENT  NON-COOPERATION” 


of  one  reckless  American  was  taken.  In  vain  Gandhi 
had  run  wildly  about  the  streets  urging  the  rioters 
to  go  home.  He  was  powerless  when  the  mob’s  blood 
was  up.  When  all  was  over  he  fasted  in  agony  of 
spirit.  He  wrote  his  famous  letter  to  the  “Hooligans 
of  Bombay,”  telling  them  sadly  that  “it  cut  me  to  the 
quick  to  find  that  you  have  used  mass  awakening  for 
your  own  lust,  for  plunder,  rapine,  and  even  indulg¬ 
ing  in  your  worst  animal  appetite.”  Gandhi  went  to 
see  the  widow  of  the  murdered  American,  actually 
begging  her,  as  I  heard  from  another  American 
present,  not  to  let  the  news  get  to  America  lest  it  hurt 
the  N.  C.  O.  (Non-cooperator)  cause!  Such  amaz¬ 
ing  innocence  of  the  telegraph  and  submarine  cable 
seems  incredible,  but  having  studied  the  processes  of 
Gandhi’s  mind,  I  believe  he  was  in  earnest.  Alarmed 
as  he  doubtless  was  by  the  huge  monster  he  had 
unchained,  he  did  pause — but,  having  fasted,  he 
resumed  the  same  agitation.  He  never  would  admit 
that  his  heights  were  too  lofty  for  the  Indian 
masses. 

With  his  approval  hartals  were  attempted  in  every 
city  where  the  Prince  of  Wales  appeared.  In  Madras 
the  lovers  of  show  and  pageantry  could  not  resist  the 
lure,  and  as  they  hastened  in  crowds  to  the  best  places 

127 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


of  view  some  Mohammedans  began  throwing  sticks 
and  stones.  A  riotous  crowd  gathered  in  a  square  just 
outside  the  wall  of  Government  House,  tore  down 
the  decorations  of  a  band  stand,  destroying  the  palms 
and  potted  flowers.  Then  a  cinema  was  attacked 
with  stones,  and  people  passing  in  motor  cars  were 
injured.  The  police  thereupon  interfered,  using  the 
greatest  restraint  and  patience  until  at  last  armored 
cars  and  military  aid  came  to  the  rescue.  The  mob 
members  ran  like  rabbits  to  their  burrows,  but  not 
before  one  of  their  number  was  killed  and  many 
heads  broken. 

A  month  later  at  Chauri  Chaura  a  mob  attacked 
the  Indian  police,  who  had  interfered  with  N.  C.  O.’s 
who  picketed  drink  and  cloth  shops,  and  in  their 
blind  rage  burned  the  police  station  into  which  the 
police  had  retreated.  Trying  to  escape,  the  police 
were  battered  to  death  with  sticks  and  brickbats,  the 
mob  acting  with  the  greatest  ferocity  and  brutality. 
Over  twenty  police  were  killed  and  their  bodies 
strewn  over  an  area  of  a  mile.  Again  Gandhi  fasted, 
five  days  this  time,  and  his  Working  Committee  of 
the  Congress  condemned  the  inhuman  conduct  of  the 
mob  at  Chauri  Chaura,  and  decided  to  suspend  “mass 
civil  disobedience”  until  the  atmosphere  should  be- 

128 


“N ON -VIOLENT  NON-COOPERATION” 


come  more  “non-violent.”  Gandhi  fasted,  because 
“love  can  only  punish  by  suffering,”  and  he  called 
Chauri  Chaura  “a  third  warning  from  God.”  He 
urged  the  murderers  to  “voluntarily  surrender  them¬ 
selves  to  the  authorities  and  make  a  clean  confession 
of  their  crimes.”  There  was  a  general  impression  at 
the  time  that  Gandhi  and  his  followers  had  been 
staggered  by  these  results  of  their  activities,  but  sud¬ 
denly  the  Working  Committee  of  the  Congress  urged 
its  followers  to  carry  “civil  disobedience”  to  the 
extent  of  non-payment  of  taxes.  Gandhi,  “oppressed 
with  doubts”  and  “shaking  with  fear,”  approved.  It 
was  tried  at  Bardoli  with  the  result  that  the  land  of 
non-taxpayers  was  seized,  and  a  great  outcry  went 
up  from  the  ignorant  peasants  who  had  not  realized 
that  consequence  of  their  action.  Then,  when  India 
for  a  moment  was  bored  with  Gandhi,  Government 
arrested  him,  brought  him  to  trial,  and  he  was  im¬ 
prisoned  without  the  least  sign  of  the  fanatical 
upheaval  which  most  observers  had  expected  to  fol¬ 
low  upon  such  an  event. 

Unless  one  realizes  not  only  how  the  Non-coopera¬ 
tor’s  activities  led  to  the  above  events,  but  com¬ 
prehends  how  the  violence  resulting  from  these  activi¬ 
ties  caused  a  growth  of  a  spirit  of  disobedience  to 

129 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


authority  and  a  habit  of  lawlessness,  which  made  the 
lives  of  all  officials  in  India  almost  unendurable,  one 
cannot  understand  how  trying  the  whole  move¬ 
ment  became.  Subdivisional  officers  in  some  of  the 
country  districts  did  their  duties  amid  menacing 
peoples  who  might  at  any  moment  turn  and  rend 
them.  In  the  civil-service  of  such  districts  men  came 
to  feel  like  a  swimmer  in  the  midst  of  the  sea  negoti¬ 
ating  for  his  life  with  a  school  of  sharks. 

The  result  of  Gandhi’s  non-cooperation  methods 
is  the  breeding  of  hate,  as  the  riots  of  Bombay, 
Madras,  and  Chauri  Chaura  plainly  revealed.  In 
each  it  was  Indians  who  chiefly  suffered.  Indians 
maltreated,  killed,  and  burned  each  other;  but  the 
attack  was  made  by  non-cooperators  upon  those  who 
seemed  either  to  obey  English-made  law,  or  to  favor 
the  British  Government.  It  was  of  little  use  for 
Gandhi  to  fast,  to  declare  that  non-cooperation  stunk 
in  his  nostrils,  and  to  threaten  to  go  into  exile  in  the 
Himalayas.  In  vain  he  urged  criminals  to  deliver 
themselves  to  the  authorities  and  confess  their  crime. 
It  was  to  no  purpose  that  he  declared  the  Chauri 
Chaura  tragedy  “a  third  warning  from  God.” 

So  far  as  Government  was  concerned,  Gandhi’s 
doctrines  had  led  to  these  tragedies.  He  himself 

130 


“NON-VIOLENT  NON-COOPERATION” 


confessed  at  Ahmedabad :  “I  have  said  times  without 
number  that  satyagraha  (insistence  on  truth)  admits 
of  no  violence,  no  pillage,  no  incendiarism ;  and  still, 
in  the  name  of  satyagraha,  we  burned  down  build¬ 
ings,  forcibly  captured  weapons,  extorted  money, 
stopped  trains,  cut  off  telegraph  wires,  killed  innocent 
people,  and  plundered  shops  and  private  houses.  If 
deeds  such  as  those  would  have  saved  me  from 
prison-house  or  scaffold,  I  should  not  like  to  be  so 
saved.”  With  all  his  fasting  and  sorrow,  his  is  the 
ultimate  responsibility.  He  had  declared  openly,  in 
print,  “I  deliberately  oppose  Government,  to  the  ex¬ 
tent  of  trying  to  put  its  very  existence  in  jeopardy. 
I  seek  to  paralyze  Government.” 

At  Gandhi’s  trial  he  pleaded  guilty,  and  said  with 
his  marvelous  frankness  that  he  accepted  all  the 
blame  that  the  Advocate- General  had  thrown  on  his 
shoulders  for  the  riots  in  Madras,  Bombay  and 
Chauri  Chaura.  “If  I  were  set  free  to-day,  I  would 
still  play  with  fire,”  he  declared.  The  people  had 
sometimes  gone  mad,  he  admitted,  and  that  was  why 
he  was  there  to  submit  to  the  highest  penalty  for 
what  in  law  is  a  deliberate  crime,  though  it  was  What 
appeared  to  him  as  the  highest  duty  of  a  citizen.  The 
judge,  Gandhi  said,  must  either  resign  his  post  or 

I3I 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


inflict  the  severest  penalty.  Indeed,  when  the  judge 
sentenced  him  to  six  years  in  prison  the  gentle 
Mahatma  made  the  kindly  comment  that  the  sentence 
was  as  light  as  any  judge  could  possibly  have  passed. 
Thus  he  remained  lovable  and  dangerous  to  the  last. 
His  arrest  and  trial  cost  the  British  Government 
many  anxious  weeks  of  preparation  and  forethought. 
The  trial  was  held  in  the  office  of  Mr.  Pratt,  the 
Commissioner  at  Ahmedabad,  next  door  to  his  home, 
which  is  an  ancient  palace  of  Shah  Jehan,  who  caused 
the  Taj  Mahal  to  be  built.  The  Government  had 
taken  ample,  though  quiet  and  unostentatious  mili¬ 
tary  preparations,  but  the  public  took  it  very  quietly 
and  with  no  excitement.  That  was  as  those  who 
believed  in  the  sincerity  of  Gandhi’s  non-violent 
preaching  had  expected,  but  some  Government  offi¬ 
cials  were  not  so  sure  that  the  faith  would  be  kept, 
and  Mr.  Pratt  spent  hours  at  the  telephone  giving 
information  and  assurance  as  the  anxious  hours 
went  by.  When  the  trial  was  over  and  Gandhi 
safely  behind  the  bars,  Government  heaved  a  sigh 
of  relief.  As  far  as  peace  and  order  in  India  are 
concerned,  all  the  results  justified  the  action  of 
Government. 

One  of  Gandhi’s  devoted  followers  was  Mrs. 

132 


“NON-VIOLENT  NON-COOPERATION” 


Naidu,  the  Indian  poetess.  Her  comment  upon  the 
trial  is  typical,  perhaps,  of  the  fanatical  adoration 
characteristic  of  the  Gandhi  disciples.  She  said  that 
as  the  strange  trial  proceeded  and  as  she  listened  “to 
the  immortal  words  that  flowed  with  prophetic  fervor 
from  the  lips  of  her  beloved  master,  her  thoughts 
sped  across  centuries  to  a  different  land  and  a  dif¬ 
ferent  age  when  the  teacher  was  crucified  for  spread¬ 
ing  a  kindred  gospel  with  a  kindred  courage.  She 
realized  anew  that  lowly  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  cradled 
in  a  manger,  furnished  the  only  true  parallel  in  his¬ 
tory  to  this  sweet,  invincible  apostle  of  Indian  liberty, 
who  had  loved  humanity  with  surpassing  compassion, 
and,  to  use  his  own  beautiful  phrase,  ‘approached  the 
poor  with  the  mind  of  the  poor.’  In  the  midst  of  all 
the  poignant  scene  of  many-voiced  and  myriad- 
hearted  grief,  he  stood  untroubled  in  all  his  tran¬ 
scendent  simplicity  and  embodied  the  symbol  of  the 
Indian  nation,  its  living  sacrifice  and  sacrament  in 
one.” 

In  Bombay,  a  wealthy  Parsi  gentleman  came  to 
take  me  for  a  ride  in  his  car.  As  I  stepped  in,  I  saw 
a  large  six-shooter  lying  on  the  seat.  With  some 
embarrassment  my  host  put  the  weapon  out  of  sight 
with  the  words,  “Mr.  Gandhi  has  made  that  neces- 

133 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


sary.”  When  that  stage  had  been  reached,  it  was 
time  for  Government  to  act. 

Strangely  enough,  and  contrary  to  all  prophecy, 
Gandhi’s  imprisonment  hardly  made  a  ripple  on  the 
sea  of  Indian  affairs.  The  Government  of  India  had 
wisely  refrained  from  seizing  him  at  the  height  of 
his  triumphant  career,  when  millions  saw  in  him  a 
saint  or  even  a  god.  But  when  the  bubble  of  his 
supernatural  attributes  was  pricked,  and  the  barren¬ 
ness  of  his  political  faith  had  disillusioned  his  more 
sagacious  followers,  then  Government  acted  firmly. 
As  the  London  Times  put  it,  India  had  had  enough 
of  the  “saintly  turbulence”  of  Gandhi,  which  he  had 
elevated  to  a  fine  art. 

Although  the  Mahatma  at  the  height  of  his  power 
had  an  almost  unprecedented  vogue  with  the  Indian 
masses,  many  of  India’s  greatest  men  intellectually 
were  opposed  to  his  methods.  Srinavasa  Sastri,  Jam- 
nadas  Dwarkadas,  Sir  Sivaswami  Aiyer,  Sir  Suren- 
dranath  Banerji  and  many  others  were  in  opposition. 
Of  Non-cooperation,  Tagore,  a  lover  of  Gandhi, 
said,  “The  idea  of  Non-cooperation  is  political  asceti¬ 
cism.  Our  students  (urged  by  Gandhi  to  remain 
away  from  colleges)  are  bringing  their  offerings  of 
sacrifices  to  what?  Not  to  a  fuller  education,  but  to 

134 


“NON-VIOLENT  NON-COOPERATION” 


a  non-education.  It  has  at  its  back  a  fierce  joy  of 
annihilation  which  at  its  best  is  asceticism,  and  at  its 
worst  is  that  orgy  of  frightfulness  in  which  the 
human  nature,  losing  faith  in  the  basic  reality  of 
normal  life,  finds  a  disinterested  delight  in  an  un¬ 
meaning  devastation,  as  has  been  shown  in  the 
late  war.  .  .  .  The  anarchy  of  mere  emptiness  never 
tempts  me.” 

Mrs.  Annie  Besant,  enthusiastic  Theosophist,  was 
also  opposed.  During  the  Great  War  she  had  aroused 
and  inspired  Indians  to  seize  that  moment  of  Eng¬ 
land’s  peril  to  compel  her  to  yield  them  swaraj,  and 
she  was  so  effective  and  dangerous  that  Government 
was  obliged  to  remove  her  to  the  Madras  Governor’s 
summer  residence  at  Ootacamund,  whence  her 
“martyrdom  was  proclaimed  to  all  India.”  She  ap¬ 
pealed  to  England  in  ringing  words : 

“Is  India  fit  for  Freedom?  She  claims  it  as  her 
Right.  You  will  not  say  her  Nay.  She  proves  her 
equality  in  death  on  the  battlefield.  Will  you  refuse 
it  when  the  peace  she  has  made  possible,  broods  over 
your  homes?  Would  they  have  been  as  safe  from 
the  German,  if  Indian  breasts  had  not  formed  part  of 
your  shield? 

“What  does  India  want?  She  wants  everything 
that  any  other  Nation  may  claim  for  itself. 

I35. 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


“To  be  free  in  India,  as  the  Englishman  is  free  in 
England. 

“To  be  governed  by  her  own  men,  freely  elected  by 
herself. 

“To  make  and  break  Ministries  at  her  will. 

“To  carry  arms;  to  have  her  own  Army,  her  own 
Navy,  her  own  volunteers. 

“To  levy  her  own  taxes ;  to  make  her  own  budgets ; 
to  educate  her  own  people ;  to  irrigate  her  own  lands ; 
to  mine  her  own  ores;  to  mint  her  own  coin;  to  be 
a  sovereign  Nation  within  her  own  borders,  owning 
the  paramount  power  of  the  Imperial  Crown,  and 
sending  her  sons  to  the  Imperial  Council.  There  is 
nothing  to  which  any  man  can  aspire  in  his  own 
land,  from  which  the  Indian  must  be  shut  out.” 

Nevertheless,  when  her  “internment”  was  ended  she 
turned  from  her  former  triumphs  in  the  Indian 
National  Congress  to  oppose  with  her  wonderful  elo¬ 
quence  the  Non-cooperation  program  of  Gandhi. 
“Apart  from  Mr.  Gandhi’s  program,”  she  said,  “it 
is  obvious  that  Non-cooperation  with  Government  im¬ 
plies  an  abandonment  of  all  the  conveniences  which 
Government  supplies.  No  one  can  buy  a  stamp,  nor 
send  a  telegram  nor  travel  by  train,  without  contribut¬ 
ing  to  the  support  of  Government.  No  one  can  bring 

136 


“NON-VIOLENT  NON-COOPERATION” 


or  defend  a  civil  suit,  nor  register  a  document,  with¬ 
out  contributing  to  the  support  of  Government.  If 
courts  are  closed  by  Non-cooperation,  no  redress  can 
be  had  for  assault,  or  robbery,  or  swindling,  or 
forgery,  or  any  other  crime  against  person  or 
property.  Crops  will  perish  for  want  of  irrigation 
from  Government-controlled  canals.  Famine  will 
result  from  the  stoppage  of  the  transport  of  goods. 
Prices  will  rise  yet  higher  from  the  same  cause.” 
“Mr.  Gandhi’s  worst  sin,”  she  declared,  “is  in  turn¬ 
ing  the  attention  of  the  country  to  this  will-o’-the- 
wisp  of  Non-cooperation  from  the  fruitful  devotion 
to  strenuous  political  reform.  He  has,”  she  said, 
“led  the  younger  men  away  from  the  path  of  work 
to  the  intoxication  of  war  against  Government,  of 
hatred,  and  of  inevitable  failure  and  subsequent  de¬ 
spair.”  For  this  counsel  of  moderation  she  was 
howled  from  the  stage  and  hustled  from  the  hall  of 
the  Indian  Congress  by  the  thousands  of  delegates 
who  had  once  idolized  her.  She  explained  to  me  how 
Gandhi  got  his  sway  in  India.  The  ablest,  most 
sober  and  responsible  men  were  opposed,  she  said, 
but  as  it  became  evident  that  they  had  no  backing 
from  the  populace,  all  but  the  bravest  and  most  tena¬ 
cious  gave  way  and  half-heartedly  joined  the  Non- 

137 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


cooperation  movement.  She  was  not  embittered, 
talked  kindly  of  Gandhi,  but  was  pressing  on  through 
the  columns  of  her  influential  paper,  New  India , 
toward  self-rule  for  India.  Yet  she  is  now  regarded 
as  a  Moderate,  and  is  very  much  in  the  good  graces 
of  the  British  Government. 

Mrs.  Besant’s  whole  philosophy  in  the  existing 
political  crisis  was  eloquently  expressed  in  her  famous 
Malabar  address  to  the  Indian  people  whom  she  loves 
with  an  almost  fanatical  passion. 

“Two  ways  lie  open  before  you.  Choose  ye  which 
ye  will  tread,  but  by  all  the  memories  of  the  uncounted 
millennia  of  your  glorious  past,  by  all  the  splendid 
hopes  of  a  yet  more  glorious  future,  by  the  sacred 
names  of  immortal  pioneers  of  liberty,  who  wrought 
and  labored  for  India’s  self-rule  during  seven  and 
thirty  years  since  the  congress  was  founded,  leaving 
the  impress  of  their  footprints  to  inspire  us  for  the 
short  remainder  of  the  way,  by  the  reverence  for 
your  fathers  who  are  watching  you  from  the  other 
side  of  death,  by  your  love  for  your  children  and  for 
the  sake  of  the  unborn  who  awaits  the  result  of  your 
work  on  the  other  side  of  birth,  above  all  for  the  dear 
sake  of  the  motherland,  whose  destiny  lies  in  your 
hands,  stop  and  think,  reason  and  meditate,  lift  your 

138 


“NON-VIOLENT  NON-COOPERATION” 


eyes  to  the  Most  High  God  and  to  the  Rishis, 
prophets  and  saints  that  love  this  sacred  land.  Then 
choose  your  way.  Choose  your  path.  God  grant  that 
you  may  choose  that  which  leads  to  freedom.  God 
guard  you  from  choosing  that  which  leads  to  anarchy, 
to  the  failure  of  India  to  accomplish  the  mighty 
mission  of  the  spiritualization  of  the  new  era.” 


VII 


INDIAN  ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE 
BRITISH  GOVERNMENT 

The  Government  of  India  Act  would  have  had 
a  better  chance  from  the  first,  if  it  had  not  been 
for  the  unfortunate  circumstances  under  which  it 
was  inaugurated.  There  were  several  untoward 
events.  Immediately  after  the  end  of  the  World 
War,  the  Government  of  India,  fearing  that  upon 
the  passing  of  its  war-powers  would  come  Indian 
anarchy,  with  which  it  had  no  adequate  powers  to 
cope,  pressed  through  its  Council  the  Rowlatt  Acts. 
These  acts  gave  the  government  an  extension  of 
its  war-powers  for  what  seemed  an  adequate  time. 
It  remained  a  dead  letter,  was  repealed  in  March  of 
1922,  and  has  always  had  a  fictitious  value  in  the 
argumentative  battle  between  the  Indians  and  the 
British.  Many  Indians  protested,  and  Gandhi  began 
his  campaign  of  passive  resistance,  using  the  favorite 
argument  of  a  conscientious  objector,  which  violates 
the  basic  principles  of  law  and  order  as  accepted  by 
believers  in  our  Western  civilization. 


140 


ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


The  first  display  of  his  power  was  a  hartal  at  Delhi, 
later  widely  extended  to  other  provinces.  A  hartal 
is  often  described  as  a  strike,  but  it  means  more  than 
that;  for,  when  it  is  successful,  a  whole  city  seems 
dead.  All  shops  are  closed,  all  activities  cease,  people 
remain  in  their  houses,  with  shutters  down.  It  would 
be  impossible  in  any  land  but  India,  where  fear  of 
public  opinion  is  a  dominant  force. 

Aroused  by  this  agitation,  which  went  far  beyond 
the  actual  demands  of  the  occasion,  the  people  of  the 
Punjab  were  aroused  to  a  frenzy  in  which  they  made 
a  brutal  attack  upon  an  Englishwoman,  murdered  five 
Europeans  in  Amritsar,  and  created  the  impression 
in  the  minds  of  those  in  the  midst  of  these  riots 
that  all  the  Punjab  was  in  open  rebellion — that  an¬ 
other  Indian  mutiny  was  imminent.  The  very 
fact  that  the  British  knew  their  Indian  people  led 
them,  perhaps,  to  be  too  fearful.  It  is  easy  for  one 
who  is  inexperienced  to  be  misled  by  the  customary 
docility  and  obedience  to  law  that  obtains  among 
the  Indian  masses.  The  Western  mind  does  not 
easily  grasp  the  fact  that  these  resigned  and  mild- 
mannered  people  can  be  stirred,  by  appeals  to  their 
ever-dominant  religious  fanaticism,  to  a  high  pitch 
of  reckless  fury.  Their  credulity  is  beyond  our 

141 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


comprehension.  No  lie  can  be  too  crude,  no  deceit 
too  open,  to  draw  them  into  insane  violence  unknown 
in  present-day  civilized  lands,  unless  it  be  in  Herrin, 
Illinois,  or  in  some  districts  of  our  South. 

Sir  Michael  O’Dwyer,  Governor  of  the  Punjab, 
urged,  and  obtained,  from  the  Viceroy  a  proclamation 
of  martial  law.  All  public  gatherings  were  strictly 
forbidden ;  and  when  the  order  was  defied  by  a  large 
meeting  in  the  public  square  known  as  the  Jallianwalla 
Bagh  at  Amritsar,  General  Dyer  marched  there  with 
a  hundred  men,  opened  fire  on  a  crowd  of  several 
thousands,  and  kept  on  firing  while  the  mob  was 
making  desperate  efforts  to  escape  by  the  narrow 
alleys  leading  off  the  square. 

The  official  account  reports  three  hundred  and 
seventy-nine  deaths,  and  several  times  that  number 
wounded.  The  whole  community  was  put  under  the 
sternest  regulations  including  a  “crawling  order” 
worthy  of  the  worst  Prussian  of  them  all. 

A  ghastly  blunder  had  been  committed,  for  which 
only  the  most  prompt  repudiation  by  the  Government 
could  make  the  least  amends.  There  was  fatal  delay, 
and  when  the  Hunter  Commission  was  appointed,  it 
was  too  late  to  appease  Indian  opinion.  It  availed 

142 


ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


nothing  that  Dyer  was  retired  from  the  service, 
and  that  the  British  Cabinet  at  last  stigmatized  his 
action  as  transgressing  ‘‘certain  standards  of  con¬ 
duct  which  no  civilized  Government  can  with  im¬ 
punity  neglect  and  which  his  Majesty’s  Government 
are  determined  to  uphold.” 

It  was  too  late.  The  affair  determined  the  hitherto 
wavering  Gandhi.  He  had  fasted  for  the  violent 
sins  of  his  followers,  but  now  he  denounced  as  satanic 
the  conduct  of  the  agents  of  the  British  Government. 
Until  it  should  show  a  complete  change  of  heart, 
Gandhi  declared  it  a  deadly  sin  for  Indians  to  co¬ 
operate  with  it.  In  a  word,  an  almost  isolated  in¬ 
stance  of  bad  judgment  and  inhumanity  by  an  indivi¬ 
dual  was  made  to  suffice  as  an  indictment  for  a  whole 
regime.  True  the  British  Government  did  not  hasten 
to  repudiate  the  action,  but  that  only  implicates  a  busy 
Viceroy  and  a  British  Cabinet  harried  by  more  World 
problems  at  the  moment  than  has  been  the  lot  of 
any  other  Government  in  history.  English  journals 
and  members  of  Parliament  denounced  the  affair 
without  stint,  though  in  the  House  of  Lords  there 
was  evident  a  dominant  approval  of  Dyer.  It  is 
true  that  Rabindranath  Tagore,  in  London  reading 
the  Parliamentary  debates,  July  22,  1920,  wrote  an 

143 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


English  friend :  “The  result  of  the  Dyer  debates  in 
both  Houses  of  Parliament  makes  painfully  evident 
the  attitude  of  mind  of  the  ruling  class  of  this  country 
towards  India.  It  shows  that  no  outrage,  however 
monstrous,  committed  against  us  by  agents  of  their 
Government  can  arouse  feelings  of  indignation  in  the 
hearts  of  these  people  from  whom  our  governors  are 
chosen.  The  unashamed  condonation  of  brutality 
expressed  in  their  speeches  and  echoed  in  their  organs 
is  ugly  in  its  frightfulness.”  Unfortunately  some 
spoke  as  Tagore  says,  and  it  was  their  voices  to 
which  the  Indian  Nationalist  most  easily  gave  ear. 
But  all  were  not  so  pessimistic  as  the  great  Indian 
poet.  It  was  an  Indian  Nationalist  who  said  to  me, 
“The  British  govern  in  India  315  millions  of  people, 
and  in  all  their  contacts  during  that  work  they  have 
only  one  Punjab  affair  in  ten  years — a  remarkable 
tribute  to  their  general  honesty  and  good  intention.” 
“The  very  fact,”  he  added,  “that  the  British  Govern¬ 
ment  can  survive  the  incessant  attacks  of  a  multitude 
of  hostile  Hindu  papers  on  the  lookout  for  any  blot 
on  their  record  is  proof  of  the  general  success  of  their 
regime.”  Nevertheless,  one  hears  to-day  from  every 
Indian’s  lips  a  fierce  denunciation  of  the  “Amritsar 
horror.” 


144 


ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


With  this  “Punjab  wrong”  was  linked  the  “Khila- 
fat  wrong.”  After  the  treaty  of  peace  with  Turkey, 
at  the  close  of  the  World  War,  in  which  the  conduct 
of  the  Turks  had  aroused  the  moral  indignation  of  the 
world,  Moslem  leaders  began  to  arouse  the  Indian 
Mohammedans  with  the  cry  that  Islam  was  en¬ 
dangered.  It  was  urged  that  the  capital  of  the 
Islamic  world,  Constantinople,  had  been  seized  by  the 
Allies  with  British  approval;  that  the  Khilafat  was 
threatened,  and  that  Moslem  holy  places  in  Asia 
Minor  had  been  violated  by  the  British,  in  spite 
of  promises  to  the  contrary.  A  fictitious  importance 
was  attached  to  it,  and  a  vast  amount  of  exaggera¬ 
tion  was  indulged  in  with  respect  to  it.  The  Honor¬ 
able  Mr.  Fazlul  Haq  said  to  me  that  some  of  his 
fellow  Moslems  had  openly  confessed  to  him  that 
“they  did  not  care  a  brass  anna  for  the  Khilafat; 
but  the  object  of  agitation  and  non-cooperation  cam¬ 
paigns  was  to  pave  the  way  for  Revolution  in 
India.”  Every  Mohammedan  I  talked  with  in  India 
discoursed  on  the  folly  of  the  British  Government 
siding  with  Greece,  who  would,  they  declared,  have 
fought  against  England  in  the  Great  War  if  she  had 
been  able.  As  to  atrocities,  the  Greek,  they  averred, 
was  quite  as  bad  as  the  Turk.  Mustapha  Kemal  was 

145 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


a  hero  in  the  eyes  of  all  “Sons  of  the  Prophet”  and 
the  Indian  Mohammedans  hailed  his  successes  with 
wild  enthusiasm. 

It  is  certain,  nevertheless,  that  it  was  necessary  in 
this  matter  of  the  Khilafat,  as  it  was  not  in  the  Pun¬ 
jab  affair,  to  engage  in  a  propaganda  to  arouse  the 
interest  and  sympathy  of  the  masses.  Moreover,  in 
this  case,  English  statesmen  were  victims  of  histori¬ 
cal  events  beyond  their  control.  Had  they  been  dis¬ 
posed,  for  the  sake  of  peace  in  India,  to  yield  all  that 
Turkey  wanted,  they  would  have  had  to  face  as  the 
alternative  the  indignation  of  a  world  (especially 
the  United  States)  surfeited  with  Turkish  horrors. 
There  had  been  no  intent  of  inflicting  injury  on  the 
Moslems  of  India.  Gandhi,  however,  was  persuaded 
by  the  Khilafat  agitators  that  the  Mohammedan 
movement  was  a  manifestation  of  religious  faith.  In 
his  simple  way  he  unquestioningly  accepted  it  as  his 
own,  calling  it  a  revolt  of  Moslem  conscience  against 
British  world-tyranny,  just  as  defensible  as  the  Hindu 
conscientious  revolt  against  the  “tyranny”  of  the 
Rowlatt  Acts.  The  Mohammedan  was  to  accept  the 
Hindu  movement  of  passive  resistance,  though  he 
much  preferred  to  fight;  and  the  Hindu  was  to  accept 
the  Moslem  Khilafat  movement.  Both  were  to  dis- 

146 


ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


play  the  soul- force  of  India,  arrayed  against  the 
brute-force  of  the  British.  Gandhi  declared  any  one 
treacherous  to  the  soul  of  India  who  would  accept 
any  mere  constitutional  reforms,  like  the  Government 
of  India  Act,  as  reparation  for  this  double  wrong. 
To  paralyze  this  Government,  he  organized  his  non¬ 
cooperation  movement.  Step  by  step  with  that  has 
gone  a  campaign  of  complaint  against  Government, 
carried  on  with  all  the  bitterness  and  invective  which 
the  radical  Indian  press  and  the  extremist  orator 
could  summon. 

The  Indian  agitator  would  make  a  much  better 
impression  upon  one  if  he  could  be  less  extravagant 
in  his  arraignment  of  the  British  regime.  Thackeray’s 
Indian  servant  who  told  him  at  St.  Helena  that 
Napoleon  ate  “three  sheep  every  day  and  all  the 
little  children  he  could  lay  his  hands  on”  had  no  more 
exuberant  imagination  than  one  encounters  every 
day  in  India.  Both  Gandhi  and  Tagore  urge  Indians 
to  drop  the  lazy  habit  of  blaming  the  British  for 
everything.  They  say,  “the  British  did  not  do  either 
good  or  bad  without  our  cooperation.”  They  de¬ 
nounce  the  cheap  theory  that  hatred  of  the  British 
is  the  beginning  of  all  virtue.  “We  suffer  for  our 
sins  and  now  is  the  time  for  repentance  and  expia- 

147 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


tion.”  “It  is  only  through  suffering  that  a  nation  can 
be  saved,”  cries  Gandhi. 

Yet  the  malcontents  gather  in  the  cave  of  Adullam, 
and  there  I  met  them  and  listened  to  their  complaints. 
After  being  led  up  tortuous  streets  and  down  back 
alleys,  through  low  dark  hallways,  into  council  rooms 
of  sedition,  I  have  sat  with  the  agitators  in  their 
clubs,  with  twenty  to  twenty-five  dark-complexioned 
faces  about  me,  earnest  with  rebellious  feelings. 
When  they  got  excited,  they  all  talked  at  once  and, 
being  foreign  to  me,  seemed  most  alarming.  I  felt 
very  strange  and  alone  among  those  outlandish 
Oriental  figures.  I  returned  to  my  room  more  than 
once  expecting  all  India  to  be  in  flames  the  next 
morning;  but  awoke  to  find  the  dawn  as  serene  as 
ever,  and  no  news  except  of  some  isolated  riot. 

The  curious  Oriental  dress  enhanced  the  alarming 
effect.  Some  about  the  council  table  wore  only  a  loin 
cloth  and  a  khaddar  scarf.  Others  were  in  rich 
robes  and  handsome  turbans.  I  recall  one  occasion, 
when  I  sat  next  to  the  son  of  a  raja,  whose  ances¬ 
tral  face  must  have  been  aristocratic  from  the  days 
of  Buddha.  Opposite  sat  a  dirty-robed,  bare-footed, 
scowling  Pathan,  who  looked  as  if  he  had  just  cut 
a  throat  and  was  enjoying  the  recollection  of  it. 

148 


ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


Some  had  caste  marks  painted  on  their  foreheads. 
Some  were  oily  and  fat,  while  others  were  thin,  with 
fanatical  faces.  One  of  Gandhi’s  disciples  proclaimed 
himself  the  “destroyer  of  Government  and  the 
founder  of  the  true  religion.”  One  told  me  with 
great  pride  what  he  was  doing  for  the  cause  of  Indian 
freedom.  He  was  editing  an  India  encyclopedia.  I 
asked  how  that  would  further  the  Indian  revolution 
at  which  he  was  aiming.  He  replied,  amazed  at  my 
stupidity,  “Why,  the  French  Revolution,  you  know, 
was  begun  by  the  Encyclopedists.”  The  Indian  radi¬ 
cals  were  inclined  to  be  most  obsequious  to  me.  One 
enthusiast  informed  me  that  I  had  glorified  India 
by  setting  my  august  foot  upon  it.  All  tried  to  im¬ 
press  me  with  the  ineffable  sins  of  the  British  Govern¬ 
ment. 

The  average  extremist  has  only  begun  when  he 
denounces  the  “Punjab  affair”  and  “the  Khilafat 
wrongs.”  Sooner  or  later  he  will  put  much  stress  on 
the  British  assumption  of  superiority.  In  fact,  one 
hears  and  reads  in  a  certain  kind  of  book  that  the 
root  cause  of  Indian  unrest  is  British  arrogance, 
superciliousness  or  insolence  toward  the  Indian. 
Actual  physical  abuse  of  the  coolies  and  the  servant 
classes  is  often  charged.  I  went  to  India  prepared 

149 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


to  see  much  of  it.  As  I  came  down  the  ship’s  plank 
at  Bombay  in  company  with  two  A.  D.  C.’s  sent 
from  Government  House  to  meet  me,  I  was  shocked 
when  one  of  them  pushed  his  cane  viciously  into  the 
ribs  of  a  chaprassi,  a  Government  House  servant,  in 
the  red  and  gold  and  white  livery  which  only  Govern¬ 
ment  servants  wear,  and  cursed  him  for  being  a  fool 
and  not  doing  what  was  expected  of  him.  “Is  this 
what  I  am  in  for?”  I  asked  myself ;  but  during  5000 
miles  of  travel,  thereafter,  in  India  I  never  saw  an¬ 
other  example  of  physical  violence  by  an  English¬ 
man.  I  saw  men  get  impatient,  I  heard  them,  espe¬ 
cially  young  men,  talk  superciliously  of  the  Indian. 
I  recall,  indeed,  several  mature  men,  high  in  Govern¬ 
ment  council,  who  assumed  that  any  opposer  of  the 
British  Government  was  a  rascal.  They  abounded  in 
stories  of  Indian  incompetence  and  were  cocksure 
that  Indians  could  never  govern  themselves.  I  heard 
some  A.  D.  C.’s  talk  sneeringly  of  “monkey  wed¬ 
dings,”  when  they  heard  of  matrimonial  affairs  in 
Indian  families,  and  I  listened  to  thoughtless  intoler¬ 
ance  of  Indian  political  aspirations.  Yet  this  attitude 
towards  the  people  of  India  was  not  predominant  as 
far  as  my  experience  went.  If  I  said  as  much  to  In¬ 
dian  acquaintances  they  replied,  “Oh,  no,  not  now; 

150 


ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


the  hukm  (command)  has  gone  out  from  London 
to  treat  us  all  on  the  same  plane  as  Englishmen.  But 
it’s  too  late  now.  Some  years  ago  it  might  have  done 
much  to  gain  our  affection,  but  they  can  never  win 
us  back  again  now  that  we  are  committed  to  our 
present  policy.” 

After  Lord  Reading,  the  Viceroy,  had  said  in  his 
Chelmsford  club  speech,  “here  in  India  there  can  be 
no  trace  and  must  be  no  trace  of  racial  inequality” 
and  added,  “there  cannot  be  and  must  never  be  any 
humiliation  under  the  British  Rule  of  any  Indian 
because  he  is  an  Indian” — after  that  all  the  army  of 
civil  servants  in  India  knew  the  cue.  But  the  Indians 
sneer  at  the  change,  and  say  the  assumption  of  su¬ 
periority  is  only  concealed.  After  all,  they  say,  “race 
inequality  exists  in  the  laws,  the  rules  of  appoint¬ 
ment,  in  the  railway  fares  and  steamer  services  of 
India.”  Lord  Morley  once  said,  “India  is  a  country 
where  bad  manners  are  a  crime.”  Certainly  there  is 
a  penalty  for  them.  Always  among  Indians  of  high 
position  who  hated  the  British  Government,  I  found 
sooner  or  later  in  my  conversation  with  them  that 
the  source  of  their  bitter  feeling  was  an  insult  suffered 
from  some  British  official.  If  I  encouraged  them 
they  would  go  into  details.  Respectable  old  men 

I5i 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


would  revert  to  a  past  when,  if  they  went  to  see  a 
collector  or  commissioner,  they  were  forced  to  leave 
their  carriages  outside  of  a  compound  and  to  walk 
in  the  carriage  way  to  the  officer’s  door.  There 
they  would  be  met  by  a  supercilious  servant  (Indian 
of  course)  who  was  insolent  and  would  at  times 
keep  them  waiting  hours.  Having  gained  admission 
to  the  office,  the  English  official  would  remain  sitting 
in  a  chair,  without  moving,  and  would  talk  haughtily 
to  the  Indian  left  standing  in  his  presence.  His 
speech  was  abrupt,  in  words  of  command,  with  no 
salutation,  no  friendly  word.  One  Indian  asserted 
that,  though  all  this  had  changed  now,  as  a  result 
of  habit  Indians  still  showed  fear.  Perhaps  that  is 
true  in  some  cases,  but  it  was  certainly  not  true 
of  the  Indians  who  came  before  James  Lindsay, 
Collector  of  Dacca,  one  of  the  finest  civil  officers  in 
the  Indian  service.  Both  he  and  Mr.  Emerson,  the 
Commissioner  there,  are  gentlemen,  before  whom  the 
humblest  man  would  feel  safe  from  insult  or  over¬ 
bearing  conduct.  I  watched  them  for  hours  listening 
to  complaints  and  righting  the  wrongs  of  the  Bengal 
natives.  But,  doubtless,  among  so  many  officers 
there  must  be  some  who  find  that  bluster  and 
swagger  is  an  easy  way  of  establishing  racial  su- 

152 


ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


periority.  Even  a  cad  can  do  it  that  way.  It  is, 
nevertheless,  the  outward  and  visible  sign  of  an  in¬ 
ward  and  spiritual  meanness.  It  seems  capable  of 
effecting  sullen  submission,  but  never  cheerful 
obedience. 

Some  that  I  talked  with  thought  that  with  the 
introduction  of  Indian  Civil  Service  examina¬ 
tions,  more  men  out  of  the  lower  orders  in  England, 
and  therefore  more  ill-bred,  had  gone  to  India,  but 
better  informed  men  doubted  that  theory.  More¬ 
over,  the  conduct  which  offends  the  highly  sensitive 
Indians  of  the  cultivated  classes  is  often  that  of  men 
who  would  pass  in  any  Western  society  as  perfect 
gentlemen.  Many  Englishmen  who  are  too  well  bred 
to  treat  Indians  with  insolence  or  contempt  are  not 
quite  up  to  the  breeding  which  would  restrain  them 
from  treating  Indians  with  half-amused  tolerance  and 
condescension.  If  one  has  no  measure  but  that  of 
the  European  standard,  few  Indians  come  up  to  it, 
and  superciliousness  is  easily  engendered,  but  if  one 
can  learn  to  give  weight  to  some  excellent  Oriental 
traits,  the  tendency  to  look  down  upon  Indians 
is  greatly  reduced. 

A  fine,  titled  old  gentleman,  Indian  member  of  a 
governor’s  council,  a  most  loyal  friend  of  the  British 

153 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


Government,  opened  up  his  heart  in  the  last  of  several 
interviews,  and  told  me  how  embittered  he  had  been 
some  fifteen  years  before  when  the  King-Emperor 
came  to  India.  At  a  great  audience  held  by  the 
sovereign,  my  Indian  friend,  then  a  judge  of  the 
High  Court,  was  seated  with  other  Indian  judges 
on  the  outer  edge  of  the  great  circle  of  spectators, 
while  the  English  judges  of  the  same  court  were 
placed  on  the  inner  circle.  He  vividly  described  his 
tortured  vanity,  his  sense  of  indignity,  as  if  the  affair 
had  been  yesterday.  But,  he  added,  with  an  almost 
childlike  radiance  in  the  memory  of  pleasure,  “At 
the  next  visit  of  His  Majesty  I  was  placed  next 
to  the  Queen  at  the  table.”  This  courtesy  and  recogni¬ 
tion  seemed  to  have  quite  restored  his  content  with 
the  British  regime. 

At  a  number  of  great  dinners  at  Government 
Houses  where  there  were  bidden  a  good  number  of 
Indian  guests,  I  noted  the  greatest  attention  paid  to 
Indian  sensibilities  in  the  seating  arrangements.  At 
clubs  like  the  Willingdon  Club,  named  after  its 
founder,  Lord  Willingdon,  where  British  and  Indians 
mingled,  I  was  struck  with  the  friendly  spirit  between 
the  two  races.  If  I  spoke  of  it  to  an  Indian  he  was 
pretty  sure  to  hasten  to  inform  me  that  a  great 

154 


ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


change  had  come  over  the  relations  of  the  two  peoples 
of  late  and  that  it  was  quite  amazing  to  old-timers. 
On  shipboard,  in  the  passage  from  Marseilles  to 
Bombay,  there  were  a  number  of  very  distinguished 
Indians  on  board,  Sir  Sankaran  Nair  and  members 
of  his  family;  Saklatvalla,  one  of  the  heads  of  the 
great  Tata  firm,  and  his  family ;  Gupta,  just  appointed 
President  of  the  Calcutta  Municipal  Council,  and 
others.  In  the  dining  room  the  Indians  were  seated 
at  a  table  by  themselves ;  the  English  women,  in  the 
early  days  of  the  voyage,  never  spoke  to  the  Indian 
women.  The  English  men,  with  the  exception  of 
two  men  returning  from  the  Labor  Conference  at 
Geneva,  did  not  at  first  talk  with  the  Indians,  but 
while  passing  the  Suez  this  all  changed;  the 
Indian  men  and  women  were  drawn  into  the  ship’s 
games  and  around  the  card  tables,  and  before  the 
end  of  the  voyage  a  most  friendly  relation  had 
sprung  up.  I  suspected  that  much  of  it  was  forced, 
and  done  with  the  Government’s  injunction  in  mind, 
but  I  would  not  be  sure  of  it. 

Able  Indian  critics  say  of  the  British  Government, 
it  never  goes  far  enough  in  its  efforts  to  stay  the  rise 
of  the  flood  of  race  hatred.  It  grants  meaningless 
concessions,  at  one  moment,  offers  a  little  feeble  flat- 

155 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


tery  the  next,  shows  pitiable  weakness  to-day,  and  im¬ 
patient  severity  to-morrow,  but  it  never  seems  fully 
to  appreciate  the  danger  from  the  rising  cloud  of 
racial  feeling  which  darkens  daily  with  its  menace. 
The  Indian  sympathizer,  C.  F.  Andrews,  who  has 
lived  with  Indians,  shared  their  food,  worn  their 
dress  when  possible — in  spite  of  the  protests  of  his 
resentful  English  friends  who  tell  him,  “A  sahib  is 
a  sahib”  and  he  ought  not  be  familiar  with  “natives” 
— protests  against  the  social  division  between  the  two 
races.  He  admits  a  “slight  unbending  for  political 
reasons.”  He  talks  of  the  British  Rule  as  “economic 
imperialism  under  the  thin  disguise  of  philanthropic 
benevolence.”  He  rages  against  the  savage  exclusion 
laws  and  white  race  policies  of  the  colonials  in  South 
Africa  and  Australia.  These,  he  says,  “hurl  India 
outside  of  the  British  Empire.” 

In  the  matter  of  social  relations  between  the  British 
and  the  Indians  there  are  greater  difficulties  than  one 
might  suppose  who  does  not  know  Hindu  and  Moslem 
social  customs.  Many  Hindus  cannot  because  of  reli¬ 
gious  scruples  eat  at  the  table  of  a  European.  I 
recall,  when  Sir  Frederick  Whyte  invited  members 
of  the  Legislative  assembly  to  dine  with  him  in  order 
that  I  might  have  an  opportunity  to  talk  politics  with 

156 


ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


them,  that  the  Indians  courteously  declined  to  partake 
of  his  food,  but  promised  to  come  in  after  dinner 
and  spend  the  evening.  Few  Indians  will  invite 
Europeans  to  meet  their  wives  in  their  homes.  Most 
of  our  Western  social  meetings  are  taboo  for  the 
Indian.  Lord  Sinha  was  bitterly  criticized  by  Indians 
for  giving  a  ball,  at  which  of  course,  very  few 
Indians  would  dance.  In  a  word,  the  British  are 
expected  to  do  everything  to  meet  the  social  customs 
of  the  Indian,  but  Indians  must  not  reciprocate  by 
bending  their  usage  to  that  of  the  British.  Indeed, 
all  Indians  of  the  intense  nationalistic  school  resent 
all  imitations  of  Western  customs.  If  Indian  minis¬ 
ters  of  Government  wear  clothes  in  Western  pattern, 
Nationalists  say  that  it  gives  patriotic  Indians  too 
strong  a  sense  of  their  affinity  with  the  British 
state.  Ministers  are  criticized  if  they  wear  semi¬ 
military  uniforms  and  swords  at  their  sides. 
Nationalists  add  with  a  sneer  that  “the  only  other 
Indian  in  civil  occupation  who  wears  a  blade  at  his 
side  is  the  toddy  climber  (a  low  caste  person  who 
climbs  the  palm  tree  and  taps  it  to  draw  the  favorite 
Indian  intoxicating  drink).”  Indians  resent  it,  when 
at  public  functions  ministers  like  Sapru  or  Shaffi 
“camouflage  themselves  in  their  white  uniforms  and 

157 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


bare  heads  into  brown  imitations  of  the  English 
bureaucrat/’  and  still  more  critical  are  they  when  on 
state  occasions  under  the  reform  government  the  two 
men  who  wear  “a  distinctively  oriental  costume  are 
the  chobars  standing  behind  the  Viceroy  at  either 
end  of  the  platform.”  Where  there  exists  such  sen¬ 
sitiveness  as  this  there  is  little  wonder  if  waves  of 
racial  bitterness  rise  now  here,  now  there  on  the 
surface  of  Indian  affairs,  breaking  up  the  old  kindly 
relations  between  the  Indian  people  and  their  British 
officials.  Insult  and  boycott  for  the  British  is  the 
twist  which  low-minded  followers  of  Gandhi  give  to 
his  teachings.  As  a  result  men  who  have  devoted 
years  to  what  they  thought  India’s  best  interests, 
who  were  single-hearted  in  support  of  the  reforms, 
begin  to  despair  of  their  own  usefulness  to  the  people 
they  have  loved,  and  they  are  now  looking  for  an 
early  retirement.  It  has  become  almost  impossible 
to  recruit  young  Englishmen  for  the  Indian  services, 
both  because  of  this  growing  race  feeling,  and  because 
of  the  lack  of  certainty  as  to  the  future  of  India. 

A  thought  which  the  traveler  in  India  can  never 
escape  is  that  even  Europeans  have  not  escaped  the 
blight  of  the  caste  system.  The  white  color  does 
make  English  and  Americans  feel  above  the  dark- 
skinned  Indian. 


158 


ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


I  have  often  asked  myself  which  race  is  superior? 
None  but  a  god  or  superman  could  decide.  Despite 
all  efforts  to  pretend  a  belief  in  equality,  neither 
representative  of  two  rival  races  believes,  in  his  heart 
of  hearts,  that  it  exists.  It  is  in  the  nature  of  the 
human  mind  to  believe  in  the  superiority  of  what 
the  owner  of  that  mind  does  and  is.  What  the 
English  are  superior  in  they  believe  to  be  the  most 
worth  while,  and  all  pretense  to  a  belief  in  the  equal 
position  of  Indian  qualities  is  the  result  of  forced 
culture  and  a  mere  varnish  over  the  true  convictions. 
It  is  just  as  true  of  the  Indian.  I  hope  that  this  is 
only  philosophical  cynicism,  and  that  it  is  not  univer¬ 
sally  true,  but  a  great  deal  of  observation  has  made 
me  believe  it  and  to  have  only  the  shadow  of  a 
doubt. 

We  Western  peoples  chide  the  Indian  because 
of  the  evils  of  his  caste  system,  but  the  British  and 
the  American  who  live  in  India  have  erected  for 
themselves  another  caste  among  the  rest.  Its  rules 
are  as  rigid  as  those  of  the  native  Hindus,  and  even 
I  was  mildly  rebuked  for  waiving  some  of  these  caste 
rules  in  my  relations  with  Indians.  Some  of  my 
English  friends  plainly  showed  their  resentment  that 
I  had  removed  my  shoes  before  entering  Gandhi's 
khaddar  tent,  and  showed  blank  amazement  that  I 

159 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


had  apologized  to  my  personal  servant  after  I  had 
for  a  moment  lost  my  temper  with  him.  I  did  not 
blame  them,  but  it  interested  me,  for  it  was  a  revela¬ 
tion.  The  curious  consequence  of  this  attitude  is 
unmistakable.  Although  India  was  a  land  of  castes 
and  a  land  where  color  was  a  basis  of  distinction 
between  Brahmans  and  lower  castes  long  before  the 
British  set  foot  upon  it,  still  the  race  hatred  based  on 
this  very  distinction,  seems  to  a  casual  observer  at 
least,  the  most  fundamental  of  all  the  conditions 
which  array  Indian  against  English.  Yet  I  firmly 
believe  that  if  the  British  should  now  leave  bag  and 
baggage,  the  rising  tide  of  hate  between  Brahman 
and  non-Brahman  would  replace  that  existing  be¬ 
tween  Brahman  and  Englishman. 

The  only  firm  conviction  I  have  upon  this  phase 
of  the  Indian  question  is  that  the  Indian  problems 
cannot  be  solved  merely  by  giving  India  a  liberal 
constitution.  If  the  English  are  to  stay  in  India, 
a  friendly  personal  relation  with  Indians  must  be  cul¬ 
tivated,  and  it  must  not  be  the  result  of  a  command 
from  on  high,  but  as  a  result  of  charitable  under¬ 
standing  and  self-control  by  persons  irritated  by  a 
climate  and  by  a  life  slowed  down  to  a  rate  most  try¬ 
ing  to  Europeans.  “You  can’t  hustle  the  East,” 

160 


ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


Kipling  has  warned  all  lovers  of  efficiency,  but  few 
can  resist  the  effort.  Perhaps  it  is  not  in  the  nature  of 
things  that  people  who  govern  many  races  should  be 
loved.  The  very  dominant  position  of  Englishmen 
has  dangerously  reacted  on  their  manners  and  made 
them  unlovable,  at  least  by  subjects.  There  are  of 
course  many  exceptions  to  this,  and  I  met  them  even 
in  high  places.  W.  R.  Gourlay,  Private  Secretary  to 
the  Governor  of  Bengal,  an  earnest  Christian  gentle¬ 
man,  his  whole  life  devoted  to  good  works,  gave  me 
sheer  delight  as  I  watched  him  receive  Indians  who 
were  seeking  an  interview  with  His  Excellency.  He 
treated  all  with  the  courtesy  which  he  would 
have  shown  the  most  exalted  European,  refusing 
their  requests  often  with  a  grace  which  sent 
them  away  as  happy  as  if  their  boon  were 
granted. 

The  climate  and  a  race  sense,  of  which  I  struggled 
in  vain  to  rid  myself,  reacted  on  my  own  manners, 
I  am  sure.  Indeed,  after  only  three  months  I  was 
less  patient  with  my  personal  servant  than  during  the 
first  three  weeks.  I  murmured,  “Thank  God !”  when 
at  last  I  let  him  go,  and  had  only  once  lost  my  temper 
with  him,  and  then  only  for  a  moment.  Therefore, 
I  do  not  preach  when  I  express  my  idea  of  what  the 

161 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


British  must  do  to  hold  India;  I  merely  state  my 
reasoned  convictions. 

Following  up  a  bitter  arraignment  of  the  British 
arrogance,  the  Indian  political  malcontent  will  declare 
that  Government  raises  too  heavy  taxes,  with  which 
it  pays  lavish  salaries  to  Englishmen,  spends  reck¬ 
lessly  on  the  army,  and  burdens  the  people  with  a 
costly  removal  of  the  Government  to  the  mountains 
during  the  hot  season.  “Being  a  foreign  government, 
it  is  selfish  and  tyrannical.”  Indians  are  not  trained 
as  army  officers,  and  are  given  only  the  minor  and 
ill-paid  civil  offices,  the  Nationalist  asserts.  Govern¬ 
ment  allows  Indians  to  be  ill-treated  in  the  British 
colonies,  he  affirms.  Rabindranath  Tagore  said  of 
this  race  problem  in  the  British  Empire :  “In  most 
of  your  colonies  you  only  admit  Asiatics  on  condition 
of  their  accepting  the  menial  position  of  hewers  of 
wood  and  drawers  of  water.  Either  you  shut  your 
doors  against  the  aliens  or  reduce  them  into  slavery. 
And  this  is  your  solution  of  the  problem  of  race  con¬ 
flict.” 

The  British  have,  cries  the  Gandhi  disciple,  made 
the  people  poor  by  draining  India  of  its  wealth. 
This  brings  in  its  train,  one  is  told,  famine  more 
frequent  and  on  a  scale  unknown  before.  Govern- 

162 


ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


ment  has  taken  the  Indian  peasant’s  land,  the  trade 
of  the  merchant,  the  industry  of  the  artisan,  declares 
the  agitator.  Most  Indians  are  deeply  concerned  over 
the  danger  of  the  white  races  exploiting  India.  They 
usually  have  distorted  ideas  as  to  how  this  has  been 
done  and  are  obsessed  with  the  notion  that  legal 
limitations  are  put  on  Indians,  whereas  the  truth  in 
the  main  seems  to  be  that  British  capital  has  rushed 
in  and  monopolized  industries  where  Indian  capital 
feared  to  tread.  Indeed,  only  very  recently  under 
successful  encouragement  of  the  great  Parsi  in¬ 
dustrialist  Tata  has  there  been  much  available  Indian 
capital.  Because  of  confidence  in  the  Tata  enterprises 
many  Indians  have  given  up  the  old  way  of  hoarding 
their  savings.  Formerly,  if  the  prosperous  artisan 
or  husbandman  did  not  bury  his  surplus  in  a  napkin, 
he  put  it  into  gold  and  silver  anklets  and  bracelets  or 
nose  rings  for  his  wife  and  daughter.  Indeed,  to-day 
in  some  parts  of  India  the  traveler  thinks  to  himself 
that  if  he  could  get  all  the  women  at  a  fair  or  religious 
fete  to  pile  their  nose  rings  and  bracelets  and  anklets 
in  the  vault  of  a  bank  he  could  finance  any  enterprise 
in  the  world.  But  of  late  years  at  least  some  little 
advance  has  been  made  in  teaching  Indians  how  to 
mass  small  savings  into  great  accumulations  of 

163 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


capital.  Before  that  India  depended  too  much  on  the 
more  courageous  and  worldly-wise  British  capitalist. 

Government  seeks  to  root  out  caste  by  polluting  the 
sugar  and  salt  that  men  eat,  even  the  clothes  that  they 
wear,  one  Indian  declared  to  me  in  all  seriousness. 
With  its  everlasting  canals,  roads,  and  railways,  it 
has  loosed  malaria.  It  has  even  poisoned  wells,  I 
have  been  informed,  and  maliciously  brought  in  the 
plague.  All  this  was  aimed  at  reducing  the  popula¬ 
tion,  and  making  it  easier  to  govern !  In  short,  cried 
C.  R.  Das  to  me,  as  we  talked  in  his  cell  in  Alipore 
jail,  the  British  have  enslaved  a  whole  people  who  are 
now  struggling  to  be  free. 

One  Bengal  enthusiast  sat,  with  his  little  Babu 
secretary  by  his  side,  and  delivered  to  me  in  my 
Government  House  parlor  an  oration  intended  to 
demonstrate  that  the  true  cause  of  all  Indian  unrest 
was — the  Englishman’s  fondness  for  beefsteak! 
With  statistics  from  the  “All-Indian  Cow  Con¬ 
ference,”  he  showed  that  this  led  to  killing  too  many 
cows,  which  reduced  the  draft  animals,  thus  cutting 
down  the  acreage  plowed,  and  resulting  in  a  smaller 
harvest,  which  left  the  Indian  people  half-starved  and 
hence  discontented!  I  was  appalled  at  the  British 
heartlessness ;  but  I  wondered  why  the  beef  eaten  by 

164 


ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


sixty-six  millions  of  Mohammedans  had  so  much  less 
effect  than  that  eaten  by  two  hundred  thousand 
Englishmen. 

One  of  the  least  convincing  of  the  charges  that 
one  often  hears  against  the  British  Government  is 
that  the  extent  and  severity  of  famines  in  India  are  a 
result  of  British  misrule,  and  that  under  the  ancient 
Hindu  and  Mohammedan  rule  the  extent  and  tragic 
results  were  less ;  but  even  as  early  as  the  writing  of 
the  Ramayana  severe  drought  is  mentioned  and  the 
Rig  Veda  hymns  have  prayers  for  rain.  It  is  signifi¬ 
cant,  says  Loveday  in  his  study,  that  in  Indian 
history  the  mention  of  famine  increases  in  exact  pro¬ 
portion  with  the  precision  and  accuracy  of  detail  of 
her  history  writers.  He  points  out  that  as  early  as 
917  an  Indian  historian  describes  famine  in  Kashmir. 
“One  could  scarcely  see  the  water  in  the  Vitasta  en¬ 
tirely  covered  as  the  river  was  with  corpses  soaked 
and  swollen  by  the  water  in  which  they  had  long  been 
lying.  The  land  became  densely  covered  with  bones 
in  all  directions  until  it  was  like  one  great  burial 
ground,  causing  terror  to  all  beings.”  Again  in  1630 
“an  extraordinary  drought  (in  the  Deccan)  burned 
up  all  vegetables  and  dried  up  the  rivers.  .  .  .  Men 
and  women  were  driven  to  that  extremity  for  want 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


of  food  that  they  sold  their  children.  .  .  .  Life  was 
offered  for  a  loaf,  but  none  would  buy;  rank  was  to 
be  sold  for  a  cake  but  none  cared  for  it  .  .  .  feet 
which  had  always  trodden  the  way  of  contentment 
walked  about  in  search  of  sustenance.”  Under 
Mohammedan  rule  after  1600,  famine  was  recognized 
in  the  law  books — “the  practice,”  runs  an  old  law, 
“among  free  men  and  women  of  selling  their  off¬ 
spring  in  time  of  famine  is  extremely  improper  and 
unjustifiable.”  There  are  many  other  examples  in 
their  history  of  the  efforts  of  rulers  to  relieve  famine. 
In  the  light  of  history,  therefore,  the  attribution  of 
famine  to  British  misrule  is  unjust,  and  as  a  matter 
of  fact  it  seems  to  be  the  efficiency  of  the  British 
administration  which  in  recent  years  has  robbed 
famine  of  its  worst  terrors.  In  July,  1900,  relief  was 
given  daily  to  six  and  one-half  million  people.  Since 
that  time  there  has  been  no  general  famine,  and 
there  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  British  experts 
have  learned  how  to  check  it. 

The  British  reply  to  such  of  the  Indian  complaints 
as  can  be  taken  seriously  is  usually  worthy  at  least 
of  being  taken  as  honest  if  not  wholly  convincing. 
As  to  lavish  salaries  the  excuse  is  given  that  admitting 
the  need  for  the  present  British  efficiency  in  civil  ser- 

166 


ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


vice,  only  a  generous  reward  will  induce  able  men  to 
leave  their  English  homes  and  friends,  and  come  into 
a  land  where  the  excessive  heat  and  unsanitary  condi¬ 
tions  endanger  their  health  and  imperil  their  lives.  I 
met  few  Englishmen  or  Americans  in  India  who  had 
not  had  enteric  fever,  and  many  had  been  near  death. 
As  Thackeray  says,  “Besides  the  official  history  of 
India  which  embroiders  banners  with  names  of  vic¬ 
tories,  which  gives  moralists  and  enemies  cause  to  cry 
out  at  British  rapine,  and  enables  patriots  to  boast 
of  invincible  British  valor — besides  the  splendor  and 
conquest,  the  wealth  and  glory,  the  crowned  ambition, 
the  conquered  danger,  the  vast  prize,  and  the  blood 
freely  shed  in  winning  it — should  not  one  remember 
the  tears  too  ?”  Kipling  has  also  expressed  the  pathos 
of  British  rule  in  India  and  how  Englishmen  have 
paid. 

If  I  asked  about  the  expense  to  India  of  the  British 
army  the  answer  was  usually  this,  “There  is  no 
escaping  the  fact  that  Indians  are  compelled  to  pay 
the  expense  of  keeping  themselves  in  subjection,  for 
Indian  taxes  pay  for  the  army,  and  for  all  the 
machine  guns,  tanks,  aeroplanes,  bombs,  which  in¬ 
sure  English  control,  but  on  the  other  hand,  India 
is  protected  against  a  very  dangerous,  predatory 

167 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


neighbor,  the  Afghan,  and  her  internal  peace  is 
secured  at  an  expense  which  could  hardly  be  much 
lower  without  great  risk.  Moreover,  she  has  naval 
defense  along  a  vast  extent  of  coast  line  at  a  merely 
nominal  cost.” 

As  to  the  removal  to  the  mountains  during  the  hot 
season,  the  expense  is  regrettable,  but  the  Englishman 
not  accustomed,  as  is  the  Indian,  through  generations 
to  the  heat,  could  not  long  endure  the  strain  of  the 
service  if  he  did  not  retreat  from  Calcutta  to  Darjeel¬ 
ing,  from  Delhi  to  Simla,  or  from  Madras  to  Oota- 
camund. 

New  measures  now  being  carried  out  by  the  British 
Government  in  the  matter  of  the  Indianization  of  the 
services  will,  it  is  hoped,  do  much  to  create  greater 
satisfaction  among  the  Indians.  Complicated  and 
difficult  as  the  question  is,  efforts  are  being  made  also 
to  create  better  conditions  for  the  Indians  in  British 
colonies.  We  in  America  ought  to  appreciate  that 
difficulty,  when  we  reflect  upon  our  own  Chinese  and 
Japanese  problems,  and,  indeed,  our  attitude  toward 
the  Indians  themselves.  Perhaps  the  British  could 
make  better  progress  toward  the  solution  of  these 
questions,  if  it  were  not  that  many  Indian  politicians 
entertain  a  dark  suspicion  that  British  officials  make 

1 68 


ARRAIGNMENT  OF  THE  GOVERNMENT 


their  political  plans  with  a  needless  caution,  because  of 
a  selfish  racial  exclusiveness.  Even  the  best-meant 
British  plans  for  betterment  of  India  are  blocked  by 
this  fear  of  some  ulterior  motive  too  subtle  for  the 
Indian  mind  to  grasp.  And  yet  some  of  the  finest 
Indians  I  met  trusted  the  British  Government  fully 
and  believed  in  its  honesty  of  purpose. 


VIII 


BRITISH  SERVICE  TO  INDIA,  AND  THE 
PROBABLE  RESULT  IF  THEY  WITHDRAW 

All  Indian  agitators  hammer  with  special  vigor 
upon  the  British  educational  policy  in  India.  From 
some  Non-cooperators  I  learned  that  the  British  had 
made  no  effort  to  educate  the  people;  but  others 
complained  that  they  had  destroyed  religion  by  their 
godless  system  of  education.  The  Indian  Nation¬ 
alist  holds  that  the  English  have  accomplished  the 
social  conquest  of  the  Hindu  to-day,  just  as  the 
Brahman  did  of  old,  by  realizing  that  knowledge  is 
power.  They  monopolized  teaching,  indeed,  took 
over  all  the  function  of  priest,  teacher,  physician, 
and  thus  became  the  brain  of  India,  guiding  all  the 
movements  of  the  body.  They  quote  Elphinstone  to 
show  the  cynical  cold-blooded  adoption  of  the  policy. 
“We  must,”  he  said,  “communicate  our  own  prin¬ 
ciples  and  opinions  by  the  diffusion  (in  India)  of  a 

170 


BRITISH  SERVICE  TO  INDIA 


rational  education  to  take  the  place  of  Indian  preju¬ 
dices.” 

Quite  another  interpretation  of  the  course  fol¬ 
lowed  by  the  British  Government  is  attributed  to  Sir 
William  Marris  by  Lionel  Curtis.  “A  despotic  gov¬ 
ernment,”  said  Sir  William,  “would  have  tried  to 
withhold  education,  or,  at  any  rate  such  as  had  any 
bearing  on  political  progress.  The  British  Govern¬ 
ment,  on  the  other  hand,  actually  encouraged  politi¬ 
cal  studies,  prescribing  standard  books  on  the  work¬ 
ing  of  representative  institutions.  Political  unrest 
was  an  inevitable  result,  and  its  existence  in  India 
so  far  from  being  a  reason  for  pessimism,  is  a  sure 
sign  that  the  British  with  all  their  manifest  failings, 
have  not  shirked  their  primary  duty  of  extending 
western  education  to  India,  and  so  preparing  Indians 
to  govern  themselves.  As  a  result  of  it,”  concluded 
Sir  William,  “self-government,  however  far  distant, 
is  the  only  intelligible  goal  of  British  policy  in  India.” 

Indians  score  Macaulay  for  replacing  their  ancient 
book  lore  with  a  foreign  language  and  literature,  for 
cutting  the  Indian  from  his  safe  Oriental  moorings 
and  setting  him  adrift  on  a  sea  of  Western  philoso¬ 
phy  and  science.  Doubtless  the  change  was  abrupt; 
perhaps  in  the  high  schools  and  colleges  too  much 

171 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


stress  went  to  literature  and  politics  and  too  little  to 
science  and  practical  subjects,  but  if  India  was  not 
to  be  a  region  of  the  world  where  time  stood  still, 
where  the  night  of  the  Middle  Ages  was  never  to  be 
dispelled  by  the  daylight  of  modern  institutions, 
something  like  Macaulay’s  plan  was  inevitable.  It 
was  not  “blighting  rhetoric,”  as  I  have  heard  it  called, 
when  Macaulay  plead  for  the  use  of  English  in 
Indian  schools.  In  the  many  Indian  languages,  he 
asserted,  there  were  no  books  on  any  subjects  which 
deserved  to  be  compared  with  those  in  English. 
They  must  teach  European  science  because  the 
Indian,  where  it  differed,  differed  for  the  worse. 
If  they  were  to  teach  the  Indians  science,  they  could 
not  teach  medical  doctrines  “which  would  disgrace 
an  English  farrier,”  astronomy  that  would  “make 
English  school  girls  laugh,”  astronomy  in  which  the 
eclipses  were  caused  by  a  dog  eating  the  moon. 
One  couldn’t  teach  history  “abounding  with  kings 
thirty  feet  high  and  reigns  30,000  years  long,”  and 
one  couldn’t  teach  geography  “made  up  of  seas  of 
treacle  and  seas  of  butter.”  There  was  exaggera¬ 
tion  in  this,  of  course,  but  it  seems  plain  that  if  the 
British  had  drawn  their  curricula  and  discipline  from 
the  Vedic  or  Indian  medieval  sources  they  would 

1 72 


BRITISH  SERVICE  TO  INDIA 


merely  have  plunged  more  generations  into  mental 
slavery  and  darkness.  Thus  they  might  indeed  have 
prolonged  their  empire,  making  Indians  easy  to  rule 
by  reason  of  their  very  ignorance  and  mental  stag¬ 
nation.  At  the  time  the  decision  was  made  Indian 
culture,  predominantly  religious,  was  and  has  re¬ 
mained  in  the  hands  of  Brahmans,  wholly  out  of 
touch  with  that  Western  culture  which  has  freed  it¬ 
self  from  superstition  and  the  narrow  bounds  of  re¬ 
ligious  creeds.  The  European  education  did  not,  as 
I  was  often  told,  destroy  the  religious  sense,  but 
shook  such  ancient  beliefs  as  had  no  proper  founda¬ 
tions  and  emancipated  the  Indian  mind.  Some  of 
India’s  greatest  men  in  the  last  generation,  Tagore, 
the  Aga  Khan,  Lala  Lajput  Rai,  Gokhale,  Tilak,  and 
even  Gandhi  himself,  are  the  products  of  this 
'‘ghastly  folly”  of  Lord  Macaulay.  H.  Fielding  Hall, 
almost  sentimental  in  his  sympathy  with  the  Indian, 
thinks  it  nonsense  that  the  failure  of  educated  Indians 
is  due  to  want  of  religion,  “that  he  is  educated  out 
of  one  faith,  not  accepted  into  another.”  It  is  absurd, 
writes  Hall,  that  by  being  brought  to  see  the  foolish¬ 
ness  of  caste,  of  infant  marriage,  or  harems  and 
zenanas,  of  silly  ceremonial  forms,  an  Indian  is  in¬ 
jured.  It  is  rather  that  taking  him  apart  from  his 

173 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


people  seems  to  render  him  desirous  of  disowning 
them,  not  of  helping  them. 

Much  is  made  of  the  failure  of  Macaulay’s  plan 
of  educating  Indians  in  college  on  the  English  plan. 
It  is  pointed  out  that  this  education  never  seeped 
down  to  the  masses  as  he  anticipated,  but  why  not? 
Because  the  Brahman,  who  on  the  whole  took  ad¬ 
vantage  of  this  opportunity,  did  not  choose  to  pass 
on  his  education  to  his  countrymen  in  the  primary 
schools.  To  the  Brahman  his  education  was  an 
advantage  which  he  wished  to  monopolize.  He  did 
not  wish  to  pass  it  on  to  others,  but  rather  to  get 
a  Government  position  for  his  greater  glory.  The 
result  is  to-day  that  the  greatest  problem  in  any 
scheme  to  educate  the  masses  of  Indians  is  the  paucity 
of  teachers.  Those  who  have  been  taught  with  that 
end  in  view  have  preferred  to  become  agitators 
against  the  British  Government  if  they  failed  to  get 
a  Government  position.  The  wages  of  primary 
teachers  are  miserable,  it  is  true,  but  they  are  all  the 
Indians  are  willing  to  pay.  I  often  visited  schools, 
and  I  found  on  inquiry  that  the  half-starved  apolo¬ 
getic  little  creatures  who  taught  them  received  fifteen 
to  thirty  rupees  a  month,  or  about  the  wage  of  an 
average  laborer  in  the  j ute  or  cotton  mills.  One  might 

174 


BRITISH  SERVICE  TO  INDIA 


say  that  that  is  the  reason  why  Brahmans  do  not 
choose  to  teach,  but  I  often  saw  them  begging  when 
they  might  have  taught.  Rather  more  than  sixty-five 
years  after  Macaulay’s  plan  was  initiated  only  one 
Indian  male  in  every  hundred  can  read  and  write 
English,  one  male  in  ten  can  read  and  write  anything. 
Since  1900  there  has  been  a  rapid  rise  in  the  per¬ 
centage  of  boys  and  girls  under  instruction,  and  yet 
less  than  thirty  per  cent  of  the  boys  and  only  five  per 
cent  of  the  girls  are  getting  any  education  of  a 
public  nature. 

Government  commissioners  in  1921  pointed  out 
that  more  than  one-half  million  villages  in  British 
India  have  no  primary  schools.  In  each  village  the 
average  number  of  school-age  children  is  60.  It  is 
not  now  possible  to  provide  the  kind  of  teacher 
needed  for  these  schools.  The  cost  is  great,  and 
there  is  little  or  no  public  opinion  in  its  favor.  So¬ 
cial  and  religious  differences  divide  the  village  com¬ 
munity  and  increase  the  difficulties.  Some  groups 
of  children  will  not  go  with  others.  The  majority 
of  inhabitants  are  too  poor  to  aid  with  taxes,  and 
the  rich  landholder  is  not  convinced  it  is  worth  while. 
That  is  the  picture  as  Government  commissioners 
drew  it.  Indians  draw  the  same  picture  but  blame 

175 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


the  British.  Nevertheless,  the  process  of  education 
along  Western  lines  has  gone  on  so  far  that  not 
only  do  the  educated  classes  draw  much  of  their  un¬ 
derstanding  of  modern  civilization  from  British 
books  and  journals,  but  also  through  the  vernacular 
press  millions  of  Indians  partake  of  that  knowledge 
-  as  it  is  dispensed  by  Indians  who  read  English. 
Official  business  is  done  in  English,  the  provincial 
councils  and  the  national  assembly  make  their  laws 
in  that  tongue,  the  high  courts  proceed  in  it.  When 
the  All-Indian  Congress  meets  to  pass  fierce  resolu¬ 
tions  against  the  British  Government,  the  only  way 
that  the  Tamil  and  Telugu,  the  Bengalee,  and  Urdu¬ 
speaking  Moslem  can  make  himself  understood  to  all 
the  rest  is  in  the  English  language.  The  English 
language  is  the  greatest  force  at  work  to-day  in 
India  bringing  about  social  and  national  unity.  Only 
through  that  medium  can  the  Telugu  and  Tamil  of 
the  Madras  region,  the  Babus  of  Bengal,  the  Parsis 
of  Bombay,  the  Pathans  of  the  North  West  Hill 
Country,  the  Rajputs  of  Rajputana  and  the  Sikhs 
of  the  Punjab  exchange  ideas,  or  carry  on  negotia¬ 
tions  aiming  at  national  unity  in  India.  If  one  com¬ 
prehends  the  significance  of  that  fact  Macaulay  seems 
to  have  laid  the  foundations  of  United  India. 

As  to  Gandhi’s  assertion  that  the  study  of  Euro- 

176 


BRITISH  SERVICE  TO  INDIA 


pean  sciences  and  literature  in  the  Government  insti¬ 
tutions  creates  that  frame  of  mind  which  he  calls 
“slavish  mentality,”  the  British  naturally  ask  did 
that  not  exist  long  before  the  advent  of  Western  edu¬ 
cation?  The  “heritage  of  his  forefathers,”  from 
which  Gandhi  says  the  Indian  is  divorced,  was  a 
state  in  which  the  Brahmans  practically  monopolized 
learning.  It  was  a  privilege  to  be  fiercely  guarded. 
All  Indians  of  the  Hindu  faith  were  made  to  think 
as  suited  Brahman  interests.  Those  not  of  that 
caste  were  debarred  from  the  study  of  the  sacred 
literatures.  Freedom  of  thought  or  action  was  de¬ 
nied.  Religion  was  exploited  to  produce  slavery  to 
the  will  of  the  Brahman.  But  under  the  new  regime 
wherever  the  light  of  Western  science  shone  the 
gloom  of  “slave  mentality”  was  dispelled.  Knowl¬ 
edge  became  the  property  of  non-Brahman  as  well 
as  Brahman.  Inquiry  and  scientific  truth  took  the 
place  of  superstitions  of  the  most  degrading  sort. 

Gandhi’s  so-called  “national  schools,”  so  far  as 
they  go  back  into  medieval  or  even  to  Vedic  times 
for  their  curricula,  send  one  more  generation  back 
into  mental  slavery  and  darkness.  In  actual  practice 
the  “national  schools,”  set  up  at  Gandhi’s  inspira¬ 
tion,  have  not  gone  so  far.  An  Indian  boy,  asked 
what  was  taught  at  the  “national”  school  which  he 

1 77 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


attended,  replied :  “Oh,  they  teach  us  to  despise  the 
Sahib  (the  British  officers). ”  Asked  if  that  was  all, 
he  said,  “That  is  the  main  thing;  the  rest  of  our 
course  is  the  same  as  usual.”  A  Gandhi  agitator 
admitted  that  there  was  little  difference  between  the 
courses  in  the  Government  and  “national”  schools, 
but  the  latter  were  “very  useful  as  centers  of  propa¬ 
ganda.”  In  fact,  politicians  and  not  educators 
have  dictated  the  policy  of  the  new  schools.  Parents 
and  schoolmasters  complain  that  the  chief  result  of 
Gandhi’s  effort  to  get  boys  to  leave  the  regular 
schools  and  attend  the  “national”  schools  has  been  to 
ruin  discipline.  Some  boys  of  college  age  seem  to 
understand  Gandhi’s  purpose  to  substitute  self-con¬ 
trol  and  self-respect  in  the  place  of  respect  for 
teachers  and  control  by  authority,  but  small  boys 
learn  only  the  anarchical  lesson.  They  take  more  to 
shouting  national  hymns  than  to  acquiring  self- 
control.  Not  even  the  use  of  Gandhi’s  miracle- 
working  spinning  wheel,  at  which  some  boys  spent 
two  hours  daily,  had  seemed  to  develop  soul-force 
in  the  Indian  youth. 

In  the  last  twenty  pages  there  is  a  fair  summary 
of  Indian  charges  against  the  British.  Omitting 
the  Khilafat  matter  and  the  Amritsar  affair,  which 

178 


BRITISH  SERVICE  TO  INDIA 


have  been  weighed  above,  I  wish  to  say  that,  after  a 
most  dispassionate  examination  of  these  alleged 
wrongs,  I  must  conclude  that  some  of  them,  like  the 
plague  and  malaria  and  beefsteak  arraignments,  are 
absurd;  some  are  the  results  of  advancing  Western 
civilization,  and  the  rest  are  based  upon  such  tempo¬ 
rary  errors  of  judgment  as  all  governments  are  likely 
to  commit,  or  upon  unalterable  conditions  or  stu¬ 
pendous  facts  before  which  any  government  would 
stand  appalled.  The  Indian  Government  has  to  meet 
the  needs  of  a  modern  state,  with  the  slender  re¬ 
sources  of  an  Oriental  community.  Moreover,  it 
has  to  bear  the  blame  not  only  for  its  own  faults,  but 
also  for  plagues  and  badly  managed  monsoons,  just 
as  American  administrations  are  blamed  for  bad 
harvests  and  the  influenza.  When  all  is  duly  con¬ 
sidered,  there  is  much  truth  in  the  British  assertion : 
“We  have  labored  untiringly  to  reconcile  Hindu  and 
Moslem.  Our  schools  and  our  railroads  have  shaken 
the  exclusiveness  of  caste;  ancient  privileges  are  dis¬ 
appearing  before  justice  and  reform  laws;  by  the 
universal  spread  of  the  English  language,  we  have 
furnished  all  educated  Indians  with  a  common 
medium  for  exchanging  their  thoughts.  We  found 
India  under  an  inefficient  despotism  and  we  ban- 

179 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


ished  it.”  It  is  the  British  who  have  put  under  irri¬ 
gation  seventeen  million  acres  of  land  hitherto  prac¬ 
tically  worthless.  They  have  made  headway  against 
two  of  India’s  most  appalling  problems,  the  famine 
and  the  plague.  30,000  miles  of  railroad  bind  India 
together,  because  British  capital  was  willing  to  ven¬ 
ture  there.  The  standard  of  living  has  been  raised  in 
India,  by  British  example  and  through  their  intro¬ 
duction  of  cheaper  goods. 

At  the  Darbar  in  Delhi  the  thought  came  to  me 
that  only  the  British  rule  made  it  possible  for  all 
the  forty  Indian  princes  to  meet  peacefully  under 
one  canopy.  The  only  unity  that  India  enjoys  to-day 
is  the  gift  of  the  British  rule.  It  has  beyond  ques¬ 
tion  brought  India  further  along  on  the  road  to 
political  competence  and  national  unity  than  she 
would  in  all  reason  have  been  without  it,  and  far 
beyond  what  any  credible  records  of  the  past  show 
her  to  have  been,  and  if  England  continues  seeking 
to  foster  self-government,  the  best  Indian  influence 
will  very  likely  choose  to  retain  her  leadership  rather 
than  cut  away  during  some  hour  of  England’s  peril. 
In  the  Arabian  Nights,  one  of  the  adventurers  throws 
water  upon  some  stones  which  used  to  be  men  but 
for  ages  have  been  by  magic  held  in  adamantine 

180 


BRITISH  SERVICE  TO  INDIA 


bondage.  As  they  spring  up,  they  attack  the  hero 
who  has  restored  them.  So  the  British  have  thrown 
the  enchanted  water  of  enlightenment  upon  the  In¬ 
dian  and  now  the  Indian  agitator  turns  on  the  de¬ 
liverer.  It  is  not  unnatural,  and  is  not  to  be  attrib¬ 
uted  to  any  fault  of  the  Indian;  it  is  merely  the  irony 
of  fate. 

Gokhale,  the  greatest  Indian  leader  before  Gandhi, 
and  a  true  statesman  rather  than  an  agitator,  said 
that  the  continuance  of  the  British  rule  “means  the 
continuance  of  that  peace  and  order  which  it  alone 
can  maintain  in  our  country,  and  with  which  our 
best  interests,  and,  among  them,  those  of  our  grow¬ 
ing  nationality,  are  bound  up.  .  .  .  The  attainment 
of  a  democratic  form  of  self-government  depends 
upon  the  average  strength  in  character  and  capacity 
of  our  people  taken  as  a  whole,  and  that  is  far  below 
the  British  average  (in  England).” 

In  1916,  the  President  of  the  Indian  Congress, 
Mohammed  Ali  Jinnah,  said  that  British  rule  “has 
maintained  for  many  decades  unbroken  peace  and 
order  in  the  land,  administered  even-handed  justice, 
brought  the  Indian  mind,  through  a  widespread  sys¬ 
tem  of  Western  education  into  contact  with  the 
thoughts  and  ideals  of  the  West;  and  this  has  led  to 

181 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


the  birth  of  a  great  and  living  movement  for  the  in¬ 
tellectual  and  moral  regeneration  of  the  people.”  In 
this  way  it  had  “created  out  of  the  diverse  mass  of 
race  and  creed  a  new  India” — brought  much  nearer 
to  political  competence  than  was  possible  without  it. 

With  those  who  only  carp  at  what  England  has 
done  in  India,  I  have  no  patience.  They  belong  with 
those  who,  as  Sydney  Smith  said,  curse  the  solar  sys¬ 
tem  because  under  it  has  come  all  our  woe.  No 
doubt,  like  the  editors  of  some  of  our  weekly  journals 
of  opinion,  they  could  have  done  better  as  to  all 
things  mundane,  but  you  see  Providence  never  took 
the  risk  of  giving  them  a  chance.  One  must  frankly 
admit  as  all  candid  Englishmen  do,  that  the  govern¬ 
ment  of  India  up  to  a  few  years  ago  was  autocratic. 
It  was,  on  the  whole,  benevolently  autocratic,  and 
while  it  did  not  neglect  the  god  of  commercial  ad¬ 
vantage,  it  also  rarely  forgot  the  due  consideration 
of  the  Indian  people.  Benevolent  to-day,  greedy  to¬ 
morrow,  never  neglecting  Mammon  but  usually 
awake  to  duty,  it  sinned  to-day  in  its  poor  human 
way,  and  acted  nobly  on  the  morrow.  Englishmen’s 
work  in  India  has  been  a  curious  blend  of  motives; 
men  of  imagination  have  shown  a  desire  to  serve  and 
embellish  India;  stupid  and  greedy  men  have  tried 

182 


BRITISH  SERVICE  TO  INDIA 


to  humiliate  and  despoil  her.  She  has  had  her  War¬ 
ren  Hastings,  marveling  at  his  own  moderation,  and 
her  Morleys  and  Ripons  lavishing  devotion  to  her 
best  interests. 

That  even  in  the  days  of  pure  autocracy  there 
were  great  Englishmen  in  India  longing  to  give  its 
people  self-government  is  shown  in  Lord  Ripon’s 
dispatch  to  the  Secretary  of  State  (1882)  wherein 
that  great  Viceroy  expresses  his  deep  sympathy  and 
high  hope  for  the  future  of  the  Indian  people : 


“No  one  who  watches  the  signs  of  the  times  in 
this  country  with  even  moderate  care  can  doubt  that 
we  have  entered  upon  a  period  of  change :  the  spread 
of  education,  the  existing  and  increasing  influence 
of  a  free  Press,  the  substitution  of  legal  for  discre¬ 
tionary  administration,  the  progress  of  railways, 
telegraphs,  etc.,  the  easier  communication  with 
Europe,  and  the  more  ready  influx  of  European 
ideas,  are  now  beginning  to  produce  a  marked  effect 
upon  the  people;  new  ideas  are  springing  up;  new 
aspirations  are  being  called  forth;  the  power  of 
public  opinion  is  growing  and  strengthening  from 
day  to  day;  and  a  movement  has  begun  which  will 
advance  with  greater  rapidity  and  force  every  year. 
Such  a  condition  of  affairs  is  one  in  which  the  task 
of  Government,  and  especially  practically  despotic 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


Government,  is  beset  with  difficulties  of  no  light 
kind ;  to  move  too  fast  is  dangerous,  but  to  lag  behind 
is  more  dangerous  still;  and  the  problem  is  how  to 
deal  with  this  new-born  spirit  of  progress,  raw  and 
superficial  as  in  many  respects  it  is,  so  as  to  direct  it 
into  a  right  course,  and  to  derive  from  it  all  the  bene¬ 
fits  which  its  development  is  capable  of  ultimately 
conferring  upon  the  country,  and  at  the  same  time  to 
prevent  it  from  becoming,  through  blind  indifference 
or  stupid  repression,  a  source  of  serious  political  dan¬ 
ger.  Considerations  such  as  these  give  great  impor¬ 
tance  to  measures  which,  though  small  in  themselves, 
are  calculated  to  provide  a  legitimate  outlet  for  the 
ambitions  and  aspirations  which  we  have  ourselves 
created  by  the  education,  civilization  and  material 
progress  which  we  have  been  the  means  of  intro¬ 
ducing  into  the  country ;  such  measures  will  not  only 
have  an  immediate  effect  in  promoting  gradually  and 
safely  the  political  education  of  the  people,  which  is 
in  itself  a  great  object  of  public  policy,  but  will  also 
pave  the  way  for  further  advances  in  the  same  direc¬ 
tion,  as  that  education  becomes  fuller  and  more  wide¬ 
spread.  It  is  only  what  ought  to  be  expected  by 
every  thoughtful  man  that  after  50  years  of  a  free 
Press  and  30  years  of  expanding  education,  with 
European  ideas  flowing  into  the  country  on  every 
side,  and  old,  indigenous  customs,  habits,  and  preju¬ 
dices  breaking  down  all  round,  as  caste  is  breaking 
down  through  the  instrumentality  of  railways  and 

184 


BRITISH  SERVICE  TO  INDIA 


other  similar  influences,  changes  should  be  taking 
place  in  the  thoughts,  the  desires,  and  the  aims  of  the 
intelligent  and  educated  men  of  the  country  which 
no  wise  and  cautious  Government  can  afford  to  dis¬ 
regard,  and  to  which  they  must  gradually  adapt  their 
system  of  administration  if  they  do  not  wish  to  see 
it  broken  to  pieces  by  forces  which  they  have  them¬ 
selves  called  into  being,  but  which  they  have  failed 
to  guide  and  to  control.  And  even  if  there  were  no 
such  necessity  as  the  present  circumstances  of  the 
country  create  for  meeting  the  needs  and  providing 
for  the  aspirations  of  a  time  of  change  and  progress, 
it  would  always  be  an  aim  worthy  of  the  English 
Government  in  India  to  train  the  people  over  whom 
it  rules  more  and  more  as  time  goes  on  to  take  an 
intelligent  share  in  the  administration  of  their  own 
affairs.  Among  the  political  objects  attainable  in 
India,  I  see  at  present  none  higher.  The  credit  of 
having  set  that  object  before  the  Government  of 
India  belongs  to  a  Conservative,  not  a  Liberal 
Statesman;  but  it  surely  behooves  the  friends  of 
liberal  principles  in  the  wide,  not  in  any  narrow  party 
sense  of  the  words,  not  to  let  Lord  Mayo’s  policy 
become  unfruitful  in  their  hands,  nor  allow  it  to  be 
stifled  beneath  the  stolid  indifference  or  the  covert 
hostility  of  men  who  cannot  understand  its  meaning 
or  appreciate  its  wisdom.  There  are,  of  course, always 
two  policies  lying  before  the  choice  of  the  Govern¬ 
ment  of  India.  The  one  is  the  policy  of  those  who 

185 


I 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


have  established  a  free  Press,  who  have  promoted 
education,  who  have  admitted  natives  more  and  more 
largely  to  the  public  service  in  various  forms,  and 
who  have  favored  the  extension  of  self-government; 
the  other  is,  that  of  those  who  hate  the  freedom  of 
the  Press,  who  dread  the  progress  of  education,  and 
who  watch  with  jealousy  and  alarm  everything 
which  tends,  in  however  limited  a  degree,  to  give 
the  natives  of  India  a  larger  share  in  the  manage¬ 
ment  of  their  own  affairs.  Between  these  two  policies 
we  must  choose;  the  one  means  progress,  the  other 
means  repression.  Lord  Lytton  chose  the  latter.  I 
have  chosen  the  former,  and  I  am  content  to  rest 
my  vindication  upon  a  comparison  of  the  results.” 

Thus  wrote  one  of  India’s  British  rulers  forty  years 
ago,  and  what  he  said  was  not  unique,  for  words  ex¬ 
pressive  of  a  like  noble  purpose  could  be  quoted  from 
earlier  and  later  Viceroys. 

If  British  rule  was  autocratic  in  the  early  day,  it 
was  after  the  Asiatic  model,  the  only  one  India  had 
known  for  centuries,  the  only  one  workable  in  India 
at  the  time,  and  it  enjoyed  the  good  will  of  the  vast 
majority  of  Indians.  Though  the  British  Govern¬ 
ment  was  autocratic  in  form,  it  rarely  undertook  im¬ 
portant  action  before  exploring  Indian  opinion,  show¬ 
ing  consideration  for  the  Indian  feeling  and  preju- 

186 


BRITISH  SERVICE  TO  INDIA 


dices.  That  heed  extended  even  to  Curzon’s  “patient, 
humble,  silent  millions”  of  peasants  who  have  no 
journals  of  opinion,  no  policies.  Surely,  we  in 
America  with  our  unsolved  negro  problem  have  no 
reason  to  throw  the  first  stone. 

The  first  question  Gandhi  asked  me  was,  “What  are 
you  going  to  do  about  the  negro  question  in  Amer¬ 
ica?”  It  was  a  searching  question.  I  recognized  the 
rebuke  for  my  impudence  in  coming  to  India  to  study, 
perhaps,  English  failures.  We,  too,  have  our 
“patient,  humble,  silent  millions,”  with  no  power  to 
vote.  Moreover,  when  I  called  the  attention  of  In¬ 
dians  to  the  brutality  of  the  riots,  the  burning  of  liv¬ 
ing  men,  which  happened  during  my  stay  in  India, 
they  gave  me  very  accurate  statistics  as  to  the  65  per¬ 
sons  lynched  in  America  (1920)  of  whom  13  were 
burned  alive,  one  flogged  to  death,  and  31  hanged. 
Gruesome  details  of  the  conduct  of  the  mob  were  fur¬ 
nished  me.  I  was  invited  to  cure  my  own  country’s 
race  war.  The  Herrin  horror  had  not  yet  come 
to  pass,  but  I  am  sure  that  Indian  politicians  could 
now  give  us  very  accurate  details  about  that  affair. 

As  for  me,  the  marvel  of  British  rule  in  India 
never  ceased  to  appeal  to  my  imagination.  In  Bom¬ 
bay,  or  Madras,  or  Calcutta,  the  British  society,  with 

187 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


its  British  statues,  British  churches,  British  conven¬ 
tions,  and  red  postboxes,  goes  serenely  on,  as  if  there 
were  no  brown  waves  of  humanity  beating  ever  upon 
the  shores  of  this  island  of  English  life.  In  India 
there  is  one  ruler  to  two  hundred  thousand  ruled. 
No  wonder  that  Horace  Walpole  cried:  “The  Ro¬ 
mans  were  mere  triflers  to  us.”  British  rule  in  India 
is  conducted  at  a  distance  of  six  thousand  miles. 
It  does  not,  like  Rome,  make  its  subjects  over  into 
Romans.  An  Englishman  goes  to  India  to  rule,  and 
when  he  has  ruled,  goes  home  again.  He  has  left 
some  seventy  millions  under  native  princes,  but  gives 
to  each  prince  a  resident  Briton,  who  curbs  any 
tendency  toward  oppressive  government. 

Our  own  experience  in  the  Philippine  Islands 
may  well  give  the  British  statesman  pause  when  he 
is  inclined  to  go  too  fast  in  the  transfer  of  political 
responsibility  to  Indian  shoulders.  In  the  Wood- 
Forbes  report  they  say  of  the  period  of  rapid  Philip- 
pinization  (1914-1921)  that  it  was  “marked  by  a 
deterioration  in  the  quality  of  public  service  by  the 
creation  of  top-heavy  personnel,  the  too  frequent 
placing  of  influence  above  efficiency,  by  the  beginning 
of  political  bureaucracy.  In  this  period  taxation  and 
expenditures  were  very  greatly  increased.” 

188 


BRITISH  SERVICE  TO  INDIA 


“We  have  in  many  instances  by  the  rapidity  of  our 
procedure  overtaxed  the  ability  of  the  people  to 
absorb,  digest  and  make  efficient  practical  use  of 
what  it  has  taken  other  nations  generations  to  absorb 
and  apply. 

“The  efficiency  of  the  public  services  has  fallen  off 
and  they  are  now  relatively  inefficient,  due  to  lack 
of  inspection  and  to  the  too  rapid  transfer  of  control 
to  officials  who  have  not  had  the  necessary  time  for 
proper  training. 

“We  find  that  there  is  a  disquieting  lack  of  confi¬ 
dence  in  the  administration  of  justice,  to  an  extent 
which  constitutes  a  menace  to  the  stability  of  the 
government.  ...  In  the  lower  tribunals  the  admin¬ 
istration  of  justice  is  unsatisfactory,  slow  and  halt¬ 
ing.  .  .  .  Political,  family  and  other  influences  have 
undue  weight.  The  condition  of  courts  of  first  in¬ 
stance  is  generally  deplorable.” 

Their  verdict  was  that  public  instruction  was  suf¬ 
fering  for  want  of  American  teachers.  “Health  and 
sanitation,”  too,  they  say,  “have  suffered  from  Philip- 
pinization,  and  the  cost  of  government  has  increased 
with  a  decrease  in  efficiency.  In  a  word,  the  very 
destruction  of  government  is  threatened.” 

If  the  commission  is  right  in  the  last  judgment, 
we  must,  indeed,  pause,  for  our  problem  in  the  Philip¬ 
pines  is  like  that  which  Lionel  Curtis  stated  for  the 

189 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


British  in  India.  “How  much  scope  can  you  give 
people  to  hurt  themselves  without  destroying  the 
fabric  of  government  altogether?” 

What  this  report  says  has  already  happened  in  the 
Philippine  Islands  may  be  foreboded  on  a  vastly 
greater  scale  in  India.  If  the  British  should  leave 
suddenly,  without  preparing  the  Indians  through  a 
long  period  to  assume  the  burden  of  government, 
there  might  easily  be  realized  the  prophecy  which  a 
governor  of  one  of  the  great  Indian  provinces  made 
to  me.  “There  would  at  once  be  riot,  murder,  rapine, 
in  the  great  cities,”  he  said.  “All  money-lenders 
would  stop  business,  all  stores  close,  there  would  be 
no  food.  Within  three  weeks  or  a  month,  the 
Afghans  would  pour  in  from  the  Northwest  for 
pillage,  plunder,  and  rapine.  The  Parsis  would  be 
wiped  out  of  Bombay,  the  Marwari  from  Calcutta. 
Mohammedan  would  be  arrayed  against  Hindu, 
Hindu  against  Moslem.  Millions  would  pay  the  for¬ 
feit,  anarchy  would  reign.” 

The  resident  at  Baroda,  Mr.  Crump,  told  me  of 
taking  five  or  six  Sikhs  to  Calcutta.  On  arrival,  he 
gave  them  some  money,  with  the  caution  to  behave 
themselves,  have  a  good  time,  and  report  next  day. 
When  they  appeared  he  asked,  “Well,  how  do  you 

190 


BRITISH  SERVICE  TO  INDIA 


like  Calcutta  ?”  One  of  them  replied :  “It  would  be 
a  great  city  to  loot,  and  ten  of  us  could  do  it,  too.” 
Thus  the  big,  warlike  Sikh  of  the  Punjab  looked 
upon  the  little,  rather  timid,  Bengalee,  whose  alert 
mind  brings  him  prosperity  which  his  neighbor 
covets. 

It  is  this  which  the  efficient  British  Government 
prevents.  It  is  an  alien  government,  but  I  have 
had  even  extremist  Indians  admit  to  me  that,  if 
India  is  to  have  any  foreign  government,  they  would 
prefer  the  British  to  any  other.  “Yes,  even  to  your 
own,”  added  one  frank  Nationalist.  Rabindranath 
Tagore  says  frankly,  “What  should  we  do  if  for 
any  reason  England  was  driven  away?  We  should 
simply  be  the  victims  of  other  nations.  The  same 
social  weakness  would  prevail.  The  thing  we  in 
India  have  to  think  of  is  this,  to  remove  those  social 
customs  and  ideals  which  have  generated  a  want  of 
self-respect  and  a  complete  dependence  on  those 
above  us,  a  state  of  affairs  created  ...  by  the  domi¬ 
nation  ...  of  the  caste  system  and  the  blind,  lazy 
habit  of  relying  upon  authority.” 

Many  of  the  Indian  leaders  deny  that  there  is  any 
ground  for  the  dire  prophecy  of  evil  days  in  store 
for  a  self-governed  India.  A  merchant  from  Indore, 

191 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


complaining  bitterly  to  me  of  the  arrogance  of  the 
British  in  assuming  to  be  better  able  to  care  for 
India’s  political  welfare  than  the  Indians,  cried  pas¬ 
sionately:  “Think  of  their  assumption!  My  people 
were  highly  civilized  thousands  of  years  ago,  when 
your  people  and  the  English  people  were  running 
about  wild  in  the  Teutoburg  Forest.” 

“Yes,”  I  replied;  “but  we  have  kept  on  running 
ever  since,  while  yours  have  stood  still.”  It  was  said 
with  a  smile,  and  he  let  it  pass. 

I  had  heard  the  argument  a  hundred  times  in 
different  forms.  I  shall  never  forget  the  Honorable 
G.  S.  Khaparde,  of  the  Council  of  State,  pacing  up 
and  down  before  guests,  who  had  adjourned  from 
the  dining  room  to  the  parlor,  and  fervidly  dis¬ 
coursing  on  India’s  past.  “Look  at  her,  worshiping 
to-day  the  same  gods,  keeping  to  the  same  civiliza¬ 
tion  she  had  four  thousand  years  ago.  Babylonia, 
Assyria,  Egypt,  Greece,  and  Rome  have  passed  away  ; 
their  gods  are  no  more;  their  civilization  is  dead; 
they  are  a  mere  historical  memory;  but  India  still 
worships  at  the  old  shrines  and  follows  the  old  social 
customs,  in  spite  of  invading  Greeks,  Persians, 
Moguls,  and  British.  And,  like  Cleopatra,  ‘age  can¬ 
not  wither  her  nor  custom  stale  her  infinite  variety.’  ” 

192 


BRITISH  SERVICE  TO  INDIA 


Sir  Surendranath  Banerji  declared  that  the  ancient 
Hindus  had  been  the  spiritual  teachers  of  the  world. 
This  mission  is  no  longer  discharged,  he  sadly  ad¬ 
mitted.  “It  must  be  set  in  motion  again,  that  India 
may  save  mankind  from  the  materialism  and  badly 
directed  moral  culture  which  led  to  the  World  War.” 

It  is  customary  for  Indians  to  sneer  at  European 
civilization.  The  war  exposed  it,  they  say.  Surely 
Indians  never  made  such  a  mess  of  their  affairs  as 
the  statesmen  of  Europe!  They  forget  that  British 
power  rescued  India  from  just  such  a  scene  of  clash¬ 
ing  races;  that  thrones,  dominations,  princely  ambi¬ 
tions,  had  for  ages  wrecked  India  before  the  British 
compelled  peace. 


IX 

THE  SPIRITUALITY  OF  THE  EAST  AND  THE 
MATERIAL  CIVILIZATION  OF  THE  WEST 

Owing  perhaps  to  the  eternal  unlikeness  of  East 
and  West,  we  shall  never  be  able  to  understand  the 
insistence  of  the  Oriental  upon  the  superiority,  in 
some  metaphysical  sense,  of  his  civilization.  When 
the  Greeks  penetrated  India  they  found  the  leaders 
there  more  concerned  with  getting  Buddhist  philos¬ 
ophy  into  Alexander’s  mind  than  absorbing  Greek 
culture  from  Alexander  who  was  to  them  a  bar¬ 
barian.  Neither  then  nor  to-day  would  Indians 
admit  they  could  learn  from  the  outside  world.  In 
spite  of  the  testimony  of  one’s  senses  they  insist 
upon  the  superiority,  the  actual  supremacy  of  Indian 
attainment.  Our  ways  of  measuring  height  and 
depth,  length  and  breadth  of  life’s  values  are  not 
the  ways  of  the  Indian.  We  look  about  us  in  India 
and  see,  except  for  what  is  British  or  influenced  by 
British  example,  all  those  phases  of  life  which  we 

194 


EAST  VERSUS  WEST 


have  come  to  think  of  as  medieval,  barbaric,  belong¬ 
ing  to  the  dark  ages  of  superstition.  We  see  filthy 
sacred  tanks,  temples  reeking  with  dirt,  idols  smeared 
with  grease,  and  the  yellow  powder  of  some  crushed 
flower  petal ;  we  see  hideous  holy  men,  whose  bodies 
are  covered  with  ashes;  we  see  the  mud  huts  and 
thatched  roofs  in  which  teeming  millions  of  Indians 
live,  and  the  bullock  carts  and  simple  plows  and 
sickles  and  flails  of  the  days  of  Noah.  Every  meas¬ 
ure  we  have  ever  used  to  rate  the  progress  and  civili¬ 
zation  of  a  people  leads  us  to  just  one  judgment  as 
to  the  place  these  people  must  occupy  in  the  scale 
of  nations.  And  then  we  talk  with  an  Indian  Nation¬ 
alist,  who  begins  by  quoting  Edmund  Burke  to  prove 
that  the  Indians  were  a  people  for  ages  civilized  and 
cultivated,  by  all  the  arts  of  polished  life,  while  we, 
Americans  and  Europeans,  were  still  in  the  woods. 
Of  course,  Burke  said  many  things  about  Indians 
and  Warren  Hastings  which  honest  investigation  has 
shown  to  be  utterly  false,  but  this  the  Nationalist 
doesn’t  know  nor  wish  to  know.  That  the  quoted 
passage  was  mere  oratory  matters  not,  for  it  was  the 
godlike  Burke,  every  whit  as  good  as  Aristotle  upon 
whom  to  tag  a  truth.  Encouraged  by  Burke  and 
other  ill-informed  enthusiasts,  the  Hindu  shuts  his 

195 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


eyes  and  chants,  “Ours  is  and  has  been  for  the  last 
6,000  years  the  eternal  ideal  of  spiritual  perfection 
for  the  individual  and  humanity.”  “Our  nation  will 
never  die  as  long  as  it  clings  firmly  to  its  great  social 
ideal.”  We  are  told  that  once  more  the  world  must 
be  conquered  by  India.  “Let  foreigners  come  and 
flood  the  land  with  their  armies,”  cries  Data  in  his 
lecture  on  “The  Work  Before  Us,”  “never  mind. 
Up,  India,  and  conquer  the  world  with  your  spiritual¬ 
ity!  Aye,  as  has  been  declared  on  this  soil,  first 
love  must  conquer  hatred;  hatred  cannot  conquer  it¬ 
self.” 

It  is  quite  true,  as  Thackeray  wrote,  that  “wolves 
in  sheep’s  clothing  gnashed  their  teeth  in  Sanskrit 
ages  before  ^Usop,”  and  many  high  thoughts,  noble 
aspirations  can  be  found  in  ancient  Sanskrit  litera¬ 
ture;  they  may  even  be  the  source  of  like  thoughts 
and  aspirations  in  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  but,  in  a 
world  of  accomplishment,  merely  to  have  thought 
beautifully  is  not  enough.  If,  as  a  result  of  the 
Yogi’s  year-long  contemplation  of  his  navel,  the  work 
for  India’s  physical  comfort  has  gone  undone,  I  can¬ 
not,  as  a  citizen  of  the  West,  shut  out  in  the  outer 
darkness  of  materialism,  understand  how  the  world’s 
spirituality  has  been  advanced.  I  listen  with  patience 

196 


EAST  VERSUS  WEST 


when  an  Indian  tells  me,  “Every  one  who  has  in  any 
way  studied  ancient  India  with  profit  knows  how  well 
and  harmoniously  this  mighty  and  complex  social 
organization  of  the  Hindu  has  worked  for  thousands 
of  years  and  how  it  has  always  tended  to  help  on 
peace,  order  and  progress,”  but  my  mind  insists  upon 
recalling  the  reign  of  thugs,  of  gang  murder,  and  of 
age-long  pillage  and  rapine  which  only  Western  civili¬ 
zation  as  introduced  to  India  by  the  British  brought 
to  an  end.  When  I  asked  skeptically  for  proofs  of 
the  spirituality  attributed  to  the  Indian  masses  I  was 
told  that  just  as  the  ancient  Greek  listened  to  poets 
recite  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey  so  the  millions  of  Indians 
listen  to  the  recitations  of  the  Mahabharata,  fabulous 
story  of  an  Aryan  war,  or  the  Ramayana,  the  ven¬ 
tures  of  Prince  Rama.  I  hoped  this  was  true,  for 
those  Indian  classics  are  better  than  the  movies 
though  I  firmly  believe  much  inferior  to  the  Homeric 
poems.  Still  with  my  hopeless  Western  mentality 
I  fail  to  understand  how  the  virtues  of  truth,  tem¬ 
perance,  honesty,  gentleness,  or  nobility  of  purpose 
are  engendered  by  listening  to  the  deeds  of  a  hero 
in  whose  army  are  300,000,000  elephants  and  150,- 
000,000  chariots,  and  one  who  drank  2,000  flasks  of 
wine  in  order  to  gain  courage  to  attack  a  monkey 

197 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


army,  and  yet  another  who  filled  the  whole  heaven 
with  the  heads  and  arms  which  he  struck  off  and 
wrhose  arrow  after  going  through  the  bodies  of  hun¬ 
dreds  of  thousands  of  the  enemy  returned  humbly  to 
his  quiver.  The  great  deeds  of  heroes,  accomplished 
through  no  virtues  or  character  of  their  own,  but 
through  magic  powers  granted  by  capricious  gods, 
afford  no  examples  from  wdiich  an  ignorant  people 
can  distill  spiritual  pabulum.  The  common  man  must 
have  a  mind  greater  than  that  of  the  poet,  whose 
mental  epilepsy  produced  these  frenzied  epics,  if  he 
can  suck  spiritual  truths  from  such  a  source.  One 
feels  about  such  Yogi  philosophy  as  Calvin  said  of 
a  certain  subject,  that  ‘‘excessive  study  of  it  either 
finds  a  man  mad  or  makes  him  so.” 

If  one  washes  to  appreciate  the  abysmal  space  and 
infinite  distances  wdiich  may  separate  Western  from 
Eastern  thought  upon  the  problems  of  life,  let  him 
read  from  216  to  230  of  Avalon’s  The  Serpent 
Power.  No  Western  madman  in  his  wildest  ravings 
could  ever  attain  to  such  incredible  nonsense.  Only 
the  Eastern  mind  can  wander  through  such  mazes 
of  absurdity.  Then  if  ever,  one  becomes  sure  that 
East  is  East  and  West  is  West  with  no  meeting  place 
short  of  Judgment  Day. 

198 


EAST  VERSUS  WEST 


Racial  vanity  might  excuse  an  Indian  for  having  a 
set  of  reeling  delusions  about  the  crazed  metaphysics 
of  a  Yogi,  but  not  the  hare-brained  enthusiasts  in 
their  temple  just  out  of  San  Diego,  and  their  sym¬ 
pathizers  elsewhere,  who  flood  the  world  with  gush 
about  these  Indian  fantasies.  One  can  only  compare 
them  with  that  silly  bird  that  buries  his  head  in  the 
sands,  when  they  ignore  all  man’s  highest  accom¬ 
plishments  as  seen  in  Western  civilization.  In  some 
cases,  it  is  true,  this  Indian  philosophy  has  affected 
Western  thought  in  a  not  unwholesome  way.  The 
Upanishads  influenced  the  Transcendentalists,  who, 
“going  to  heaven  in  a  swing,”  found  there  the  meta¬ 
physical  ideas  suited  to  their  purpose.  With  this 
philosophy  they  gave  a  trend  to  American  idealism 
which  one  cannot  seriously  regret.  The  sympathy 
of  fanatical  Orientalizers,  idolizers  of  Hindu  litera¬ 
ture  and  art,  is  most  dangerous  to  India,  for  those 
wild  idealists  share  the  Indian  delusions  as  to  a 
glorious  past,  without  being  called  upon  in  any  way 
to  share  in  the  responsibility  for  the  present.  They 
help  to  confuse  racial  pride  and  racial  vanity,  devo¬ 
tion  to  the  future  of  India  with  a  worship  of  her 
past. 

However,  not  all  admirers  of  Indian  civilization 

199 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


past  and  present  are  blind  to  the  responsibilities  of 
to-day.  Annie  Besant,  confirmed  believer  in  the 
Hindu  superior  spirituality,  berates  the  Indian  people 
for  maintaining  large  crowds  of  men  as  mendicants, 
in  the  full  strength  of  vigorous  life,  who  are  inno¬ 
cent  of  all  sacred  learning,  “innocent  of  the  light, 
who  have  nothing  of  the  holy  man  but  the  cloth  that 
covers  them,  and  who  are  nevertheless  fed  and  shel¬ 
tered  by  the  millions.”  Indeed,  the  census  shows  that 
five  million  of  such  drones  live  by  begging,  and  they 
cost  the  Indian  people  sixty  million  dollars  annually, 
which  might  be  used  to  educate  India.  Instead 
of  making  an  effort  to  profit  by  that  wise  advice,  the 
Indian  agitator  prefers  to  place  the  entire  blame  for 
inadequate  support  of  education  upon  the  British 
Government. 

One  of  the  tests  of  the  civilization  of  a  people 
which  Westerners  apply  is  the  interest  shown  in  a 
nation’s  historical  monuments  and  architectural  re¬ 
mains.  Here  India  ranks  low  indeed,  for  when 
Lord  Curzon  began  his  noble  work  of  rescuing 
India’s  decaying  and  neglected  temples,  mosques, 
forts  and  monuments,  they  were  so  disregarded  that 
the  materials  of  beautiful,  ancient  buildings  were 
being  used  to  furnish  stones  and  rubble  for  modern 


200 


EAST  VERSUS  WEST 


buildings,  and  beautiful  fanes  possessed  of  exquisite 
carved  marble  as  at  Agra,  Ahmedabad  and  Delhi 
were  serving  as  one  wall  for  the  mud  houses  of  a 
village.  Even  the  beautiful  Taj  Mahal  at  Agra,  now 
given  so  fine  a  setting,  had  become  engulfed  amid 
the  squalid  huts  of  an  Indian  village.  British  admin¬ 
istrations  preceding  Lord  Curzon’s  regime  cannot  be 
wholly  exculpated  from  this  blame,  and  it  is  even  re¬ 
lated  that  one  viceroy  actually  contemplated  taking 
down  the  Taj  Mahal  and  selling  the  exquisite  marble 
of  which  it  is  composed. 

True,  not  all  of  India’s  art  is  that  of  bygone  days. 
In  cities  like  Ahmedabad  one  sees  beautiful  carving 
on  the  doorposts,  lintels  and  beams  of  new  houses, 
and  the  modern  school  of  Indian  art,  with  which 
Tagore’s  name  is  associated,  produces  very  lovely 
pictures,  while  exquisite  taste  is  shown  in  many  in¬ 
dustrial  arts  carried  on  by  Indian  workmen.  In 
spite  of  these  unpleasant  conclusions  about  India’s 
civilization,  and  even  though  we  accept  William 
Archer’s  dictum  that  “India  is  as  yet  far  from  being 
prepared  to  take  an  equal  place  among  the  civilized 
nations  of  the  world,”  it  is  wise  to  consider  the  pro¬ 
test  of  Sir  Ashutosh  Mukherji :  “Blame  us  not  if  we 
deem  it  inconsistent  with  true  National  consciousness 


201 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


that  the  first  and  last  words,  the  final  and  definite 
judgments  on  Indian  civilization  should  be  pro¬ 
nounced  in  intellectual  centers  far  beyond  the  limits 
of  our  Motherland.  Be  it  remembered  in  this  con¬ 
nection  that  the  attempt  to  modernize  the  East  by 
the  importation  of  Western  culture  in  our  midst  to 
the  complete  suppression  of  our  native  ideals  has 
proved  a  failure.  Indian  Universities  have  not  yet 
been  able  to  take  root  in  the  life  of  the  Nation,  be¬ 
cause  they  have  been  exotics.  India  was  and  is  civil¬ 
ized.  Western  civilization,  however  valuable  as  a 
factor  in  the  progress  of  mankind,  should  not  super¬ 
sede,  much  less  be  permitted  to  destroy,  the  vital  ele¬ 
ments  of  our  civilization.”  There  is  much  truth  in 
Sir  H.  H.  Risley’s  assertion  that  in  India  to-day  “one 
sees  a  sort  of  disordered  kaleidoscope  in  which  the 
oldest  and  newest  ideas  of  the  human  spirit  whirl 
round  together  in  the  most  bewildering  fashion. 
While  a  renowned  Indian  scientist  lectures  there  on 
the  transcendental  properties  of  metals  under  the  in¬ 
fluence  of  electricity,  widows  were  being  burned  alive 
in  Bihar,  human  sacrifice  was  suspected  in  Orissa, 
and  in  Calcutta,  center  of  light  and  leading,  men 
wise  in  trade  were  unwilling  to  go  out  nights  lest 
their  heads  be  taken  for  cement  in  the  foundations 


202 


EAST  VERSUS  WEST 


of  the  Victoria  Memorial  Hall.”  All  the  generaliza¬ 
tion  about  India’s  stage  of  civilization  is  futile. 
One  sees  the  hairy  Bheel  and  the  jungle  man  with 
his  bows  and  arrows  worshiping  perhaps  a  stick  or 
a  stone  or  a  mud  image,  but  one  also  meets  Rabindra¬ 
nath  Tagore,  and  distinguished  mathematicians. 
One  finds  Indians  who  live  on  snakes  and  lizards  and 
wear  beaded  and  feathered  garments  like  those  of 
the  American  Redman,  but  next  evening  he  sits  at  a 
most  elegant  table  at  government  house  with  Lord 
Sinha,  a  peer  of  the  realm  and  once  governor  of 
Bihar  and  Orissa.  The  attainable  spiritual  heights 
for  the  individual  Indian  are  very  high,  but  the 
great  riddle  is  how  far  can  he  lift  the  masses  toward 
his  high  level.  Why  does  Sir  Jagadis  Chandra  Bose 
find  no  Indian  peer  in  the  field  of  science? 

Does  India  stand  in  the  forefront  of  barbarous 
nations,  or  in  the  vanguard  of  civilized  nations? 
I  don’t  know.  Only  omniscience  could  answer  that, 
and  I  have  never  had  any  heart  to  heart  talks  with 
Providence.  But,  if  prevailing  ideas  in  our  Western 
world  are  right,  India  is  not  wholly  civilized.  India 
has  a  state  of  society,  not  savage  exactly,  but  simple 
and  destitute  of  comforts,  beyond  the  conception  of 
untraveled  Americans.  It  is  a  society  which  has  its 

203 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


simple  pleasures,  and  a  not  unaffectionate  family 
life.  Its  only  outstanding  civilized  trait  in  Occi¬ 
dental  eyes  is  its  art  creations  along  certain  lines. 
In  any  native  street,  one  sees  beautifully  carved  col¬ 
umns,  beams,  lintels ;  and  in  the  temples  and  mosques 
of  Northern  India  one  sees  architectural  beauty  un¬ 
surpassed  by  the  classic  or  Gothic  architecture.  Yet 
all  these  lovely  monuments  of  Indian  art  were  being 
neglected,  and  even  used  for  building  materials,  until 
Lord  Curzon  began  his  noble  work  of  rescuing  the 
decaying  and  neglected  temples,  mosques,  and  ancient 
forts.  And  what  was  his  reward?  Lord  Morley 
said  of  Lord  Curzon :  “You  have  never  sent  to  India 
a  Viceroy  his  superior,  if,  indeed,  his  equal,  in  force 
of  mind,  in  unsparing  remorseless  industry,  in  pas¬ 
sionate  and  devoted  interest  in  all  that  concerns  the 
well-being  of  India,  with  an  imagination  fired  by 
the  grandeur  of  the  political  problem  India  presents,” 
but  he  always  trusted  to  efficiency  and  never  to  politi¬ 
cal  concessions,  and  the  Indians  hate  him  accord¬ 
ingly.  Never  have  I  heard  a  man  more  bitterly 
spoken  of  than  this  man,  who  among  other  things 
saved  India’s  art  treasures.  He  did  good  for  India 
but  he  did  it  with  a  cudgel.  He  drove  the  Indians 
toward  their  own  best  interests,  and  they  resented 
the  assumption  of  superiority. 

204 


EAST  VERSUS  WEST 


In  a  lifetime  men  do  not  tire  of  India’s  myriad 
colors,  its  myriad  forms.  In  dress  alone,  its  people 
know  an  infinity  of  ways  of  exposing  the  charm  of 
the  human  body.  I  have  never  before  seen  such 
artistic  grouping  of  colored  garments  as  a  large 
crowd  of  Indians  displays.  Nor  can  one  elsewhere 
see  such  a  variety  of  faces  as  in  the  Indian  crowd, 
from  the  ferocious  long-haired  Bheel,  to  the  refined 
Christlike  Brahman.  The  streets  of  Bombay,  with 
their  hundreds  of  thousands  of  chattering,  aimlessly 
moving  human  beings,  doing  a  myriad  of  inexpli¬ 
cable  things  in  the  midst  of  sunlit,  highly  colored 
streets,  are  the  most  interesting  of  sights.  Such 
squalor,  such  dirt,  such  incredible  fanaticism,  such 
bathing  in  vile,  sacred  pools,  such  mumbling  of 
holy  phrases,  such  fits  of  passion  and  such 
mild  resignation,  I  never  saw  nor  want  to  see 
again. 

That  the  English  have  taught  these  people  even  the 
rudiments  of  sanitation  is  greatly  to  their  credit.  I 
take  a  reverent  attitude  before  the  patience  and  de¬ 
votion  that  has  moved  fanatical  mountains.  I  have 
the  greatest  respect,  and  even  admiration  for  many 
cultured  Indians  I  have  met ;  but  my  Occidental  den¬ 
sity  renders  me  wholly  unable  to  see  the  wonderful 
spiritual  qualities  which  enthusiasts  find  in  the  lower 

205 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


classes  of  Indians.  If  all  were  like  Sir  Jamsetjee 
Jeejeebhoy,  blue-blooded  even  to  the  earliest  genera¬ 
tion,  aristocratic  as  a  Bohun  or  a  Biddle,  like  Sir 
Narayan  Chandavarkar,  or  filled  with  exalted 
thoughts  like  Rabindranath  Tagore,  I  could  accept  the 
attribute,  but  not  for  the  masses  one  actually  sees  in 
the  villages,  in  the  city  streets,  or  along  the  bathing 
Ghats  at  Benares.  I  know  just  how  sadly  some  of 
my  good  Indian  friends  will  shake  their  heads  over 
this,  and  I  am  truly  sorry  to  grieve  them.  Perhaps 
I  have  seen  too  little,  only  the  surface,  and,  being 
unable  to  speak  the  Indian  languages,  could  little 
appreciate  the  depths  of  the  Indian  soul.  I  hope 
that  they  are  right  and  that  I  am  wrong,  for  if  I  have 
correctly  measured  the  attainments  of  Indian  civili¬ 
zation,  it  will  need  generations  of  patient  effort  to 
raise  it  to  a  stage  where  more  than  four  or  five 
millions  out  of  the  three  hundred  and  fifteen  millions 
can  intelligently  take  a  part  in  their  self-government. 

One  of  the  first  steps  to  that  end  will  be  a  loosing 
of  the  bonds  which  keep  the  Indian  mind  in  a  bond¬ 
age  of  religious  superstition.  Religion  is  the  funda¬ 
mental  thing  in  Indian  life  and  permeates  every  fiber 
of  the  social  structure.  Fear  of  fanatical  opposition 
by  Indians,  animated  by  religious  bigotry,  has  often 

206 


EAST  VERSUS  WEST 


caused  the  Government  of  India  to  be  overcautious 
in  its  attitude  towards  many  undoubted  social  evils 
and  abuses  and  it  even  cools  their  ardor  for  sanitary 
reforms.  The  mosquitoes  in  Bombay,  for  example, 
could  be  controlled  by  destroying  some  of  the  Hindu 
sacred  tanks  and  the  Parsi  wells  from  which  they 
take  water  for  sacramental  purposes,  but  any  rumor 
that  such  measures  of  sanitation  were  about  to  be 
taken  would  stir  the  embers  of  religious  fanaticism 
into  a  blaze.  The  Parsis  were  thrown  into  a  fever 
of  protest  when  the  aviation  service  was  first  estab¬ 
lished  near  Bombay  and  some  of  the  army  fliers 
soared  over  the  Parsi  “Towers  of  Silence,”  where 
the  Parsi  dead  are  laid  to  be  devoured  by  the  flocks 
of  vultures  who  wait  there  in  ceaseless  vigil  for  their 
prey.  Parsi  leaders  hastened  to  Government  House 
to  cry  out  against  this  profanation  of  the  sacred 
mysteries  by  the  prying  eyes  of  the  aviators.  Gov¬ 
ernment  ordered  at  once  that  thereafter  all  army 
fliers  should  respect  the  sanctity  of  the  “Towers  of 
Silence.”  Government  hesitated  many  years  before 
it  tried  to  interdict  by  law  the  Hindu  rite  of  “Sati” 
or  “Suttee,”  the  burning  of  widows  upon  the  funeral 
pyre  of  the  lamented  husband.  Hideous  as  the  cus¬ 
tom  was  in  Western  eyes,  the  British  long  feared  to 

207 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


clash  with  the  religious  sanction  given  it  by  the 
Hindu  religion.  In  1829  the  venture  was  made  and 
was  in  the  main  successful,  though  it  is  said  still  to 
be  popular,  easily  revived  if  chance  offered.  Even 
as  I  write  I  find  in  the  daily  press  an  account  of  a 
case  of  its  revival  near  Calcutta. 

Later,  Government  grappled  with  the  appalling 
custom  of  the  murder  of  girl  babies,  a  custom  grow¬ 
ing  out  of  the  fact  that  the  direst  of  social  re¬ 
proaches  fell  upon  a  Hindu  father  who  had  an  un¬ 
married  but  marriageable  daughter.  To  prevent 
such  a  calamity  coming  upon  him  a  father  refused 
to  trust  to  fortune  and  made  way  with  unwelcome 
girl  arrivals,  until  the  death  rate  of  female  infants 
rose  like  the  tide  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy.  Even  severe 
measures  failed  to  check  this  crime.  British  officials 
were  cynically  told  that  the  “parents  look  after  the 
boys  and  God  looks  after  the  girls,”  but  they  refused 
to  accept  that  reflection  upon  the  Hindu  divinity  and 
proceeded  to  check  infanticide  by  increasing  taxes  or 
making  trouble  for  any  village  which  had  an  unduly 
low  proportion  of  girls. 

The  next  problem  was  infant  marriages,  due  to 
the  same  fear  of  social  ignominy  should  a  daughter 
be  left  upon  the  parents’  hands.  Moreover,  the  laws 

208 


EAST  VERSUS  WEST 


of  Manu  command  a  man  of  24  to  marry  a  girl  of 
8  and  one  of  30  a  child  of  12.  Such  child  wives 
faded  quickly,  had  weak  children,  made  no  stronger 
by  the  Hindu  prohibition  of  a  meat  diet,  and  the 
child  mother  often  pined  and  died  at  an  early  age. 
Even  that  evil  the  British  attacked,  and  within 
British-Indian  territory  it  is  now  a  penal  offense  to 
marry  girls  under  twelve  years  of  age.  Advanced 
Indian  groups  like  the  Arya  Somaj  support  the 
British  in  this  obviously  wise  measure,  but  the  vast 
mass  of  Indian  opinion  regards  this  as  one  more  of 
the  British  “crimes  against  India.”  That  sullen  mass 
support  of  a  custom  so  plainly  evil  is  only  one  of 
the  many  proofs  forced  daily  upon  the  traveler  that 
India  has  not  yet  fought  its  way  out  of  the  night  of 
religious  fanaticism  into  the  daylight  of  knowl¬ 
edge. 

Without  making  any  effort  adequately  to  describe 
the  religions  of  India  I  wish  to  call  to  mind  some 
outstanding  facts  which  one  must  know  in  order 
to  understand  their  effect  on  Indian  politics. 

Except  some  70,000,000  of  Mohammedans  the 
vast  majority  of  the  315,000,000  of  Indians  are 
Hindus.  The  Hindu  religion  has  been  called  “A 
tangled  jungle  of  disorderly  superstitions,  ghosts  and 

209 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


demons,  demi-gods,  deified  saints,  household  gods, 
tribal  gods,  universal  gods,  with  their  countless 
shrines  and  temples — and  the  din  of  their  discordant 
rites — deities  who  abhor  a  fly’s  death,  and  those 
who  delight  still  in  human  victims.”  Thus  it  would 
strike  any  passing  observer,  thus  it  struck  me,  but 
I  am  quite  ready  to  admit  that  it  is  a  superficial 
judgment.  The  scene  about  and  in  a  Hindu  temple 
is  most  picturesque  though  smeared  over  with 
squalor  and  filth.  At  the  entrance  and  throughout 
its  dim  recesses  are  the  persistent  mendicants,  the 
mumbling  Yogis,  naked,  emaciated,  covered  with 
ashes,  and  often  the  huge  temple  elephant  swinging 
down  upon  one  through  the  corridor  of  grotesquely 
carved  pillars.  If  a  priest  accompanies  the  visitor 
the  arcana  may  be  opened  and  one  may  see  the  brazen 
chariots  and  the  amazing  animals  of  brass,  which 
mounted  on  wheels  appear  on  festival  days  in  the 
sacred  processions.  Through  some  dark,  impassable 
doorway  one  may  see  the  stone  cow  god  being 
anointed  with  a  holy  unguent  and  sprinkled  with  the 
yellow  flower  petal  dust  by  an  ill-looking  priest.  As 
one  sees  these  things  one  is  taken  back  in  spirit  from 
one  to  two  thousand  years  in  the  history  of  the 
human  race.  Hinduism  is  sensual  in  some  aspects, 


210 


EAST  VERSUS  WEST 


spiritual  in  others,  of  the  earth  earthy  in  some  out¬ 
ward  manifestations,  but  dreamy  and  metaphysical 
in  the  extreme  on  the  spiritual  side. 

Hinduism  is  constantly  splitting  up  into  new  sects, 
getting  new  gods,  new  forms.  As  a  sponge  it  takes 
up  the  rites  and  strange  gods  of  other  sects.  It  has 
no  Rome,  no  pope,  no  bishop,  no  church  council. 
There  is  a  priest  only  for  sacrificial  purposes,  and 
temple  priests  are  not  respected  by  their  fellow 
Brahmans.  There  is  no  organized  church.  As  actu¬ 
ally  practiced  it  is  a  chaos.  It  exists  for  the  aristo¬ 
crat,  has  no  social  humanitarianism,  denies  the 
equality  of  men,  condemns  millions  to  untouchability. 
The  lowest  castes  may  not  even  enter  the  temples 
of  Siva  and  Vishnu.  Such  is  the  dominant  religion, 
the  real  child  of  the  Indian  mind.  Among  the  more 
backward  people  of  India,  among  the  hill  tribes,  for 
example,  many  “godlings,”  represented  perhaps  by  a 
vermilion-daubed  stone  under  a  tree,  have  only 
local  habitations,  where  the  simple  peasant  gives 
them  offerings  and  knows  them  better  than  the  great 
gods  whom  the  Brahmans  honor.  More  than  ten 
millions  in  India  are  so  wholly  given  over  to  the  wor¬ 
ship  of  deities  who  haunt  trees,  rocks,  whirlpools, 
rivers,  and  who  even  preside  over  cholera  and  small- 


21 1 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


pox,  that  they  are  classed  as  animists  by  the  census 
takers.  To  them  rocks  and  stones  are  endowed  with 
mysterious  power  and  the  spirits  that  roam  the  world 
settle  down  in  such  inanimate  objects.  The  higher 
castes  know  not  these  “godlings,'f  but  follow  the 
rites  approved  by  Brahmans,  bathing  in  the  Ganges 
at  the  appointed  time,  going  on  a  pilgrimage  to  the 
places  made  holy  by  Vishnu  or  Siva,  eating  and 
drinking  in  accord  with  the  prescribed  ritual.  These 
“best  minds”  shake  their  heads  sadly  over  the  de¬ 
based  worship  of  blocks  and  stones.  To  them  the 
chanting  of  sacred  hymns,  and  leading  a  holy  life 
alone  wins  salvation. 

I  recall  one  Zacharias,  a  Polish  Jew,  who  was 
associated  with  the  “Servants  of  India”  group  at 
Poona,  and  who  has  taken  on  the  Indian  dress, 
Indian  food,  and  the  manner  of  eating  it,  who  is, 
indeed,  more  Indian  than  the  Indians.  He  talked 
most  sympathetically  of  the  way  the  Hindus  inter¬ 
preted  allegorically  the  myriad  idols  of  their  religion 
and  “pierced  through  to  the  lofty  spiritual  creed” 
behind  it.  He  declared  dogmatically,  “Idolatrous 
as  the  Hindu  seems  he  is  not  without  spiritual 
ideas.”  I  was  willing  to  be  convinced  when  the  cul¬ 
tured  Indian  was  in  mind,  but  I  was  incredulous 


212 


EAST  VERSUS  WEST 


as  far  as  the  untutored  millions  were  concerned. 
Some  ignore  all  the  differences  of  sects.  The  Maha¬ 
raja  of  Alwar  told  me  that  he  had  twelve  guests  in  his 
camp  and  many  servants,  and  among  them  all  there 
were  some  twenty  sects;  but  he  said  all  are  Hindus. 
“With  all  the  varieties  of  worship,  of  idols,  of  gods, 
of  caste  marks,  there  is  but  one  essential  religion.” 

The  truly  spiritual  Hindu  says,  “There  is  one 
thing,  Brahma;  there  is  nothing  else.”  God  is  all. 
There  is  no  matter.  Disease,  rocks,  trees,  flesh,  the 
solid  earth  itself,  all  are  such  stuff  as  dreams  are 
made  on.  Rid  yourself  of  desire,  break  the  fetters 
of  existence,  and  find  reality  by  entering  into  the 
world  spirit.  Thus  may  your  life  he  rounded  with 
a  sleep.  This  melancholy  idea  is  the  basis  even  of 
popular  religion,  says  the  enthusiast.  The  very 
ryot  sees  God  in  everything,  believes  in  Karma,  the 
state  thus  reached.  Hence  his  sad  outlook  and  his 
resignation.  The  one  essential  in  Hinduism  seems 
to  be  the  divine  right  of  the  Brahman.  It  has  been 
said  you  may  throw  over  the  Hindu  trinity,  Brahma, 
Siva,  Vishnu;  make  new  gods,  foul  as  you  please; 
give  yourself  up  to  sickening  orgies,  reject  all  faith 
in  supernatural  forces,  but  abide  by  caste  rules, 
don’t  touch  the  unclean,  and  above  all  reverence  and 

213 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


feed  the  Brahmans.  The  God  himself  is  content 
with  water  and  a  few  half- withered  flowers.  Kali, 
the  goddess,  more  deadly  than  the  male,  wants  blood, 
but  the  Brahman  wants  food  and  raiment.  A  Hindu 
will  tell  you  that  to  slay  a  Brahman  is  a  mortal  sin. 
One  who  even  threatens  him  with  violence  will 
wander  for  one  hundred  years  in  hell,  while  the  man 
who  seizes  his  property  will  feed  in  another  world  on 
the  leavings  of  vultures.  Judging  from  these  penal¬ 
ties  one  would  be  little  better  than  one  of  the  wicked 
if  one  offended  a  Brahman. 

But,  if  the  superstitious  public  may  not  openly  do 
ill  to  one  of  these  holy  men,  they  may  avenge 
themselves  with  their  opinions,  as  many  Hindu  prov¬ 
erbs  testify.  Indian  folklore  abounds  with  flings 
like  the  following :  The  Brahman  is  “A  thing  with 
a  string  around  its  neck.”  (A  profane  hit  at  the 
sacred  thread  which  the  Brahman  wears.)  “Blood¬ 
suckers  three  on  earth  there  be,  the  bug,  the  Brah¬ 
man  and  the  flea,”  is  a  popular  bit  of  Hudibrastic 
verse.  “Before  the  Brahman  starves  the  king’s 
larder  will  be  empty,”  is  a  sneer  at  the  persistent 
begging  of  the  Brahman.  “In  his  greed  for  funeral 
fees  he  spies  out  corpses  like  a  vulture,”  is  a  jibe  at 
the  greed  of  the  Brahman  which  costs  the  poor 

214 


EAST  VERSUS  WEST 


Hindu  so  dearly.  “He  defrauds  the  gods;  Vishnu 
gets  the  barren  prayers,  while  the  Brahman  devours 
the  offerings.”  “He  will  beg  with  a  lakh  of  rupees 
in  his  pocket,”  echoes  a  suspicion  that  one  often 
has  as  he  is  besieged  by  begging  Brahmans  at  the 
temple  doors.  I  thought  it  was  quite  in  character 
when  a  Brahman  told  me  frankly  that  he  wanted 
the  English  to  get  out. of  India  if  his  caste  could  suc¬ 
ceed  to  power,  but  if  the  Brahmans  could  not  be 
assured  of  that  they  would  fight  the  scheme  of  Indian 
self-government  to  the  end. 

But  the  complications  which  religion  brings  into 
Indian  politics  do  not  end  with  the  effects  of  the 
Hindu  religion.  The  70,000,000  Mohammedans 
with  their  far  more  vigorous  and  warlike  natures 
add  greatly  to  the  complexity  of  the  situation.  It 
was  seven  hundred  years  ago  that  the  Moslem  power 
broke  into  India  from  the  North.  Thereafter  the 
Mohammedan  with  one  god  and  the  Hindu  with 
many  vied  with  each  other.  The  political  conqueror 
never  changed  the  religion  of  the  masses  who  en¬ 
compassed  him,  but  he  never  wholly  abandoned  the 
effort.  The  clear-cut  creed  of  Mohammedanism  is 
based  on  the  Arabic  Koran,  which  permits  no  com¬ 
promise  with  “idolatrous  Hinduism.”  It  thinks 

215 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


only  of  conquest.  It  has  one  god  of  whom  no  image 
can  be  made.  Democracy  is  its  watchword  and  is 
utterly  opposed  to  the  aristocracy  of  caste.  All  are 
equal  under  the  aegis  of  Islam.  Caste  finds  no  sup¬ 
port  from  it.  Nevertheless,  the  Moslem  in  India 
respects  Hinduism  and  lets  it  alone  in  most  parts 
of  India.  Not  always,  as  recent  riots  in  Punjab 
and  the  Moplah  rebellion  reveal.  Many  a  riot  arises 
over  a  pig  or  a  cow,  for  against  the  Hindu’s  holy 
cow  the  Moslem  places  the  unholy  pig.  Side  by  side 
in  India  these  antagonistic  religions  have  been  left 
by  fate.  The  Mohammedan  is  a  missionary,  the 
Brahman  never  proselytes.  Under  the  British 
regime,  however,  the  Moslem  makes  little  effort  to 
win  converts,  but  is  content  with  making  the  entrance 
to  the  fold  easy.  Neither  race  nor  caste  bars  any¬ 
body.  Only  in  the  fury  of  a  rebellion  does  the 
Moslem,  now  under  fear  of  British  power,  attempt 
conversions,  but  when  as  in  the  Malabar  region  re¬ 
cently  they  do  begin  that  process,  it  is  with  brutality 
and  ferocity  beyond  anything  in  Western  experience 
except  Herrin  miners  and  Southern  mobs  on  the 
occasion  of  a  negro  lynching. 

In  India,  as  in  all  the  Orient,  religions  might 
almost  be  called  a  substitute  for  nationalities.  The 

216 


EAST  VERSUS  WEST 


Moslems,  70,000,000  of  them  in  India,  are  to  all  in¬ 
tent  a  nation,  and  Government  has  to  regard  them 
as  such.  Hindu  religion  has  affected  the  religion 
of  Islam  in  India,  even  tainting  it  with  caste.  Mos¬ 
lems  in  parts  of  India  know  little  of  the  Koran,  but 
will  fight  Hindus  under  the  banner  of  Allah.  In 
practice  these  have  an  animist’s  superstitions.  There 
are  curious  mixtures  of  Hinduism  and  Mohamme¬ 
danism  in  Rajputana.  In  large  towns,  however,  the 
Hindus  and  Moslems  are  separate. 

In  addition  to  the  Mohammedans  and  Hindus 
there  are  some  10,000,000  Buddhists,  chiefly  in 
northeastern  India,  and  nearly  4,000,000  Christians, 
but  neither  these  nor  the  3,000,000  Sikhs,  1,000,000 
Jains,  and  about  100,000  Parsis  have  any  marked 
effect  on  the  political  situation.  The  presence  of  the 
English,  the  education  of  Indians  in  England,  has 
added  many  dissenters,  especially  from  Hinduism, 
to  the  great  list  already  existing.  The  emancipated 
ones  break  with  the  old  religion,  try  to  better  the  lot 
of  the  depressed  classes,  and  attack  the  aristocratic 
Brahman.  The  Brahmo  Somaj  and  Arya  Somaj 
movements  are  examples.  Groups  like  the  Deccan 
Liberal  Club  seek  to  break  bonds  of  tradition,  and 
especially  to  better  the  lot  of  the  down-trodden  un- 

217 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


touchables.  It  is  in  such  organizations,  and  the  in¬ 
fluence  in  general  of  the  Western  educated  Indian, 
that  one  sees  a  faint  gleam  of  hope  that  India  may 
in  the  future  escape  somewhat  from  the  bondage  of 
religious  superstition.  Or,  if  in  the  light  of  the 
eternal  verities  all  Western  science  is  false  and  if 

9 

mechanical  development  is  but  a  vain  and  hopeless 
increase  in  material  things,  and  if  the  meditations 
of  the  Yogi  do  in  truth  lead  to  the  happiness  of  man¬ 
kind,  India  may,  indeed,  let  the  Western  legions 
thunder  past  with  their  sound  and  fury,  and  plunge 
in  thought  again  to  her  own  salvation.  But  can  any 
sane  Western  mind  grant  that  hypothesis?  Mine 
cannot.  I  look  to  see  India  accept  slowly  the  best 
of  Western  civilization,  and,  giving  it  her  own  pe¬ 
culiar  flavor,  rise  to  self-government,  and  greater 
freedom  of  thought. 


X 


INDIAN  POLITICAL  FITNESS  AND 
AUGURIES  FOR  THE  FUTURE 

A  question  which  the  observer  of  Indian  life 
constantly  asks  is  whether  India,  even  if  freed  from 
the  incubus  of  a  medieval  religious  life,  has  men 
capable  of  assuming  the  burden  of  governing  one- 
fifth  of  the  human  race.  The  English  say: 
“Political  responsibility  is  a  thing  few  Indians  will 
shoulder;  if  they  do,  they  grow  weary  soon,  and  allow 
self-interest  and  family  interest  to  corrode  it.”  I 
have  had  astounding  cases  of  nepotism  in  Indian 
high  officials  absolutely  proved  to  me.  Many  empha¬ 
size  the  contradiction  between  the  Indian  politician’s 
distrust  of  the  British,  and  the  almost  universal 
Indian  respect  for,  and  demand  for,  the  Sahib’s 
administration.  Except  among  the  agitators  I  did 
not  find  so  great  a  demand  for  putting  more  Indians 
in  the  civil  service.  Indianization  of  the  services 
does  not  mean  simply  replacing  Englishmen  by 
Indians  but  replacing  them  by  Brahmans,  Bengalis, 

219 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


Marathas,  Sikhs  or  Mohammedans,  by  men  of 
various  castes  and  religions  each  struggling  for 
power,  for  the  welfare  of  the  group  to  which  each 
officer  would  belong,  but  not  in  all  likelihood  for  the 
good  of  India. 

That  the  majority  of  Indians  do  not  favor  Indians 
in  offices  of  trust,  is  a  common  saying  in  India. 
“Many  Indian  officials  have  quick,  destructive  little 
minds,  touchy,  vain,  polite,  evasive,  but  not  strong, 
confident,  burden-taking  minds, ”  asserted  a  keen, 
liberal,  and  experienced  Englishman.  Perhaps  this 
is  a  prejudiced,  uncharitable  view;  but  when  one 
talks  with  cultured  Indians — the  best  of  them — and 
appreciates  the  singular  gentleness  of  soul  which 
marks  them,  one  wonders  whether  out  of  their 
number  one  could  select  ministers  with  “backbone 
and  guts” — one  who  will  “pull  his  weight  and  not 
be  afraid  of  a  racket” — as  an  English  friend  ex¬ 
pressed  it.  In  an  ideal  world  full  of  peace  and  good 
will  one  could  hardly  do  better,  but  in  this  vale  of 
tears  and  machine  guns  such  gentle  souls  seem  unfit 
for  the  burdens  of  state.  Nevertheless,  I  have  never 
felt  any  doubt  that  experience  would  give  them  the 
sterner  qualities.  It  is  all  a  matter  of  being  grad¬ 
ually  accustomed  to  the  burden.  But,  even  if  leaders 


2-20 


INDIAN  FITNESS  AND  THE  FUTURE 


in  India  can  by  degrees  gain  the  strength  and  char¬ 
acter  to  bear  the  weight  of  great  public  affairs,  is  it 
probable  that  they  can  escape  the  compulsion  of  caste 
to  a  degree  that  will  let  them  deal  fairly  with  masses 
of  people  not  encircled  by  their  caste  wall?  For  it 
must  never  be  ignored  that  besides  the  disintegrating 
effect  of  religions  upon  Indian  political  life,  there 
is  the  influence  of  caste  which  is  the  very  foundation 
of  Hinduism. 

The  last  Indian  census  enumerates  over  2,300 
minor  castes,  a  maze  wherein  there  is  a  milkman’s 
caste,  a  herdsman’s  caste,  a  blacksmith’s  caste,  and 
even  a  robber  caste  such  as  the  Kallars  in  the 
Madura  district;  but  there  are  four  main  castes 
whose  origin  is  a  matter  of  dispute.  The  explanation 
most  plausible  to  me  was  that  which  attributes  their 
origin  to  the  successive  invasions  into  India  of  races 
pouring  in  through  the  northwest  mountain  passes, 
and  driving  the  Dravidian  or  aboriginal  stock  ever 
southward.  The  priests  of  these  invading  Aryan 
peoples  made  of  their  race  the  “twice-born  classes,” 
the  Brahman  priest,  the  warrior  or  Kshatriya,  the 
Vaisya,  or  cultivator  of  the  soil.  Of  the  Dravidian, 
or  aboriginal,  they  made  the  Sudra,  meekly  to  serve 
the  classes  above.  By  the  devices  of  priestcraft  the 


221 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


religious  sanction  was  given  to  the  custom  that  one’s 
social  position  and  relations  in  the  family  were  pre¬ 
determined  by  the  mere  chance  of  birth  in  one  caste 
or  another.  “What  is  written  on  a  man’s  forehead 
by  the  gods,  cannot  be  rubbed  off,”  says  the  Hindu 
fatalist.  What  a  man  shall  wear  in  this  wicked 
world,  what  he  shall  eat  and  drink,  with  whom  he 
shall  wed  is  settled  by  the  custom  of  that  caste 
into  which  it  has  pleased  God  to  call  him.  No  logic 
can  support  it,  no  reason  can  be  given  for  it,  it  is  so. 
Its  object  seems  clear.  The  Brahmans  who  devised 
it  desired  no  doubt  to  keep  their  society  in  compart¬ 
ments,  with  their  own  dominant,  and  above  all  not 
to  have  their  own  entered  by  marriage  from  below. 
In  theory  the  Brahmans  are  one  caste,  but  in  practice 
there  are  many  divisions.  The  mazes  of  classifica¬ 
tion  are  too  much  for  the  finite  mind  of  the  West. 
When  a  Brahman  may  marry  is  a  problem  in  higher 
mathematics.  He  may  not  marry  within  an  inner 
circle  of  clansmen,  and  he  must  not  marry  outside 
of  an  outer  circle.  In  the  case  of  a  Rajput  the  inner 
circle  wherein  he  may  not  marry  is  said  in  cases 
to  contain  100,000  persons.  There  too  the  many 
clans  have  an  order  of  precedence  and  no  man  will 
marry  his  daughter  in  a  clan  of  lower  order  than  his 


222 


INDIAN  FITNESS  AND  THE  FUTURE 


own.  A  Brahman  of  one  group  may  have  scruples 
against  taking  water  from  some  Brahman  of  another 
group.  The  inordinate  pride  in  being  a  Brahman 
gives  him  great  satisfaction,  but  he  pays  for  this  by 
the  apprehension  of  pollution  from  the  touch  of  the 
unclean.  Only  those  who  suffer  from  a  lively  sense 
of  the  omnipresence  of  germs  can  understand.  A 
religious  ceremony  brings  him  into  this  charmed 
circle  into  which  he  was  born.  A  Brahman  or 
Kshatriya  boy  gets  his  second  or  spiritual  birth 
when  given  his  first  lesson  in  offering  oblations  to 
the  gods.  He  recites  short  Vedic  texts,  and  is  given 
the  “sacred  thread”  by  solemn  ceremony.  This  thin 
coil  of  three  or  more  cotton  strands  is  the  symbol 
of  the  Brahman’s  divine  origin,  and  is  an  emblem 
of  the  glory  which  is  a  Brahman’s.  Indeed,  the 
whole  caste  system  is  plainly  devised  for  his  exalta¬ 
tion. 

The  caste  rules  seem  inexplicable  and  capricious 
to  the  untutored  Western  mind.  One  is  always  ask¬ 
ing,  why?  On  a  journey  a  good  Hindu  may  re¬ 
ceive  water  of  a  doubtful  purity  from  some  castes 
but  may  not  take  it  from  the  purest  source  in  the 
most  sanitary  vessels  from  persons  of  certain  other 
inferior  castes.  A  low  caste  man  may  not  be  even 

223 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


a  personal  servant  in  the  house  of  a  higher  caste. 
His  very  touch  would  pollute.  Indeed,  if  but  the 
shadow  of  an  “untouchable”  falls  upon  the  water 
carried  by  a  Brahman  for  a  journey,  he  throws  it 
out  scornfully.  Some  “untouchables,”  beef-eaters, 
for  example,  defile  a  Brahman  at  sixty-four  feet, 
others,  like  toddy-drawers  only  at  thirty-two,  while 
the  Kammalan  group,  masons,  carpenters,  and 
leather  workers  contaminate  at  twenty-four  feet. 
Such  men  cannot  enter  the  humblest  Hindu  temple. 
The  “untouchables”  must  even  beg  from  the  road¬ 
side,  on  the  “side  lines,”  and  must,  like  ancient 
lepers,  warn  approaching  upper-caste  men  of  their 
impurity.  A  friend,  G.  W.  Padisson,  who,  for 
thirty-five  years  was  an  Indian  Civil  Service 
man  in  the  Madras  district,  and  now  the  Com¬ 
missioner  of  Labor  in  that  province,  told  me  of 
seeing  a  Brahman  march  majestically  down  a 
village  street  ringing  a  bell  so  that  all  pariahs 
might  get  at  a  proper  distance.  He  had  seen  untouch¬ 
ables  summoned  to  a  law  court,  but  obliged  to  sit 
several  hundred  feet  down  the  road  so  as  not  to 
pollute  Brahman  lawyers  and  judges.  At  Poona  I 
was  told  of  untouchables  who  were  criminals  and 
who  had  to  report  to  Indian  police  every  evening; 

224 


INDIAN  FITNESS  AND  THE  FUTURE 


to  avoid  polluting  the  Brahman  clerk  they  tossed 
their  card  to  the  police  who  looked  and  tossed  it  back. 

Mr.  Padisson  had  some  seven  millions  of  these  out¬ 
casts  under  his  care,  and  was  trying  to  better  their 
lot  by  establishing  stores  from  which  they  could  buy 
without  the  disadvantage  of  having  to  throw  their 
money  in  a  door  and  have  the  purchased  article 
thrown  out  to  them.  He  also  was  trying  to  supply 
them  with  Government  wells  whence  they  might 
draw  water,  for  the  upper  caste  people  even  in  a 
village  will  not  allow  untouchables  to  come  near  a 
well  used  by  them.  There  are  in  all  India  some  fifty- 
three  millions  of  these  depressed  people. 

It  is  the  panchayats,  the  governing  bodies  of  vil¬ 
lage  communities,  which  enforce  caste  as  far  as  that 
is  necessary,  though,  in  a  way,  caste  enforces  itself. 
It  regulates  a  man’s  wages  like  a  trade  union.  It 
prescribes  his  food  and  whom  he  shall  not  marry. 
It  keeps  him  out  of  degrading  work.  Ostracism  is 
the  penalty  of  disobedience.  All  refuse  any  com¬ 
munion  with  him.  Even  the  barber  deserts  him, 
and  if  he  dies  none  will  bury  him.  Some  told  me 
that  “the  bonds  of  caste  are  being  burst  asunder  by 
the  disruptive  forces  of  modern  ideas  and  that  the 
Indian  spirit  is  now  about  to  be  liberated  from  this 

225 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


prison  house  of  the  past.”  “Such  facile  assurances,” 
says  Risley,  “proceed  for  the  most  part  from  philan¬ 
thropic  Englishmen  who  have  seen  little  of  India  be¬ 
yond  the  presidency  towns,  who  know  none  of  the 
vernacular  languages,  and  who  get  their  impressions 
from  the  small  body  of  Anglicized  Indians,  a  disor¬ 
ganized  class  within  the  community  ...  an  artificial 
and  exotic  product.”  In  some  cases  it  is  true  of  eat¬ 
ing  and  drinking,  but  not  in  the  essential  matter  of 
marriage.  The  effect  of  railroad  travel  has  led  to 
curious  casuistry  as  to  caste  rules.  A  Brahman  may 
not  drink  water  from  unsanctified  sources,  but  may 
buy  ice,  and,  when  it  has  melted,  quench  his  thirst. 
If  no  food  cooked  by  one  of  his  own  caste  is  avail¬ 
able,  he  may  buy  National  Biscuit  Company  products 
in  a  package  and  consume  them  with  a  calm  sense  of 
perfect  piety.  The  carelessness  as  to  caste  rules 
(eating,  drinking,  pollution  by  contact,  etc.)  which 
a  tourist  sees  from  his  railway  carriage  comprises 
only  the  accidents  of  caste  which  may  change  from 
year  to  year  as  convenience  or  fashion  may  dictate. 
“The  substance  of  the  system,”  says  Risley,  “lies 
hidden  from  the  eye  of  the  globe-trotter  in  the  hard 
and  fast  rules  which  regulate  marriage.”  Here, 
“there  are  no  signs  of  compromise  or  concession.” 

226 


INDIAN  FITNESS  AND  THE  FUTURE 


The  idea  that  any  properly  constituted  Hindu  should 
wish  to  marry  outside  of  his  caste  would  seem  to  a 
Hindu  too  preposterous  for  discussion. 

It  is  still  true  that  to  millions  caste  is  the  most 
serious  matter,  and  life  is  absorbed  in  its  petty  de¬ 
mands.  Sir  Herbert  Risley  says  the  snobbery  of 
caste  has  been  actually  augmented  by  better  com¬ 
munications.  People  travel  more,  pilgrimages  are 
easily  made  and  social  groups  not  before  affected  be¬ 
come  orthodox.  Caste  is  more  rigidly  observed, 
especially  as  to  marriage,  than  before.  Brahmanical 
influence  is  more  diffused.  That,  and  reviving  the 
authority  of  the  Hindu  scriptures,  and  the  idea 
that  Hindu  civilization  is  the  most  exalted  and 
worthy  of  emulation  the  world  has  seen,  increases 
the  power  of  caste. 

Nevertheless,  caste  and  some  of  its  most  dubious 
results  have  great  and  powerful  enemies,  individuals 
as  well  as  new  sects  and  societies.  Rabindranath 
Tagore  is  the  enemy  of  outworn  tradition  and  preju¬ 
dice.  The  caste  system  hinders  the  free,  creative  im¬ 
pulses  of  man,  he  says.  Gandhi,  on  the  other  hand, 
says  that  without  the  restrictions  of  caste,  communal 
life  would  be  endangered.  Tagore  says  caste  is  re¬ 
sponsible  for  the  moral  bankruptcy,  the  cynical  self- 

227 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


ishness  and  the  bitter  class  feeling  of  modern  Indian 
life.  Gandhi  says  that  those  who  have  shaken  off 
caste  are  drifting  aimlessly  in  the  eddies,  with  no 
sense  of  social  responsibility.  Without  caste  the  In¬ 
dian  people  would  be  landed  in  chaos.  Gandhi  is, 
however,  against  untouchability.  “I  regard  untouch- 
ability  as  the  greatest  blot  on  Hinduism.  .  .  . 
I  was  hardly  yet  twelve  when  this  idea  had  dawned 
on  me.  A  scavenger,  named  Urka,  an  untouchable, 
used  to  attend  our  house  for  cleaning  latrines.” 
Gandhi  used  to  ask  his  mother  why  he  was  forbidden 
to  touch  him  and  why  ablutions  after  it.  He  thought 
his  mother  was  wrong.  At  school  he  often  touched 
untouchables,  and  was  always  naturally  against  the 
idea  of  untouchability. 

Many  of  the  educated  classes  are  secretly  or  openly 
opposed  to  caste  evils,  but  their  activity  against 
them  is  very  slow  in  its  effect.  There  are  in  India 
1,700,000  (in  1911)  who  are  literate  in  English. 
If  all  these  besieged  the  citadel  of  caste,  a  generation 
would  pass  before  it  could  be  carried.  But  there  are 
even  among  them  few  iconoclasts,  only  those  alien¬ 
ated  in  some  way  from  Indian  society.  With  growth 
of  nationalistic  spirit  there  is  even  a  tendency  among 
educated  classes  to  hold  Indian  religion,  usage,  phi- 

228 


INDIAN  FITNESS  AND  THE  FUTURE 


losophy  as  superior  to  Western,  and  these  would  up¬ 
hold  caste.  So  age-long  and  so  firm  is  its  hold  on 
India  that  to  withdraw  caste  from  Indian  society, 
says  Risley,  would  be  more  than  a  revolution.  “It 
would  resemble  the  withdrawal  of  some  elemental 
force  like  gravitation  or  molecular  attraction.” 
Great  Indian  leaders  agree  with  Risley.  There  is  no 
tendency  to  rebel  against  the  prescriptions  of  caste, 
said  Gokhale,  unless  in  a  small  circle  of  those  who 
“have  come  under  the  influence  of  some  kind  of 
English  education.”  Outside  of  that  Indians  regard 
caste  as  the  natural  law  governing  human  society. 

It  is  interesting  to  speculate  as  to  what  effect 
caste  would  have  in  a  democratically  governed 
country.  Under  a  democracy  in  India  caste  would 
provide  the  party  in  power,  the  party  that  had  spoils 
to  be  divided,  with  a  “machine”  surpassing  in  effi¬ 
ciency  the  wildest  dream  of  the  American  state  or 
ward  boss.  Men  would  be  compelled  to  vote  solid 
by  penalties  compared  with  which  a  papal  interdict 
was  an  ineffectual  instrument.  A  man  who  offended 
would  find  himself  cut  off  from  the  barest  necessi¬ 
ties  of  life,  as  well  as  the  enjoyment  of  the  amenities. 
None  would  eat,  drink,  smoke  with  him,  or  sell 
food  to  him.  The  barber  would  desert  him,  the 

229 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


dhobi  would  not  wash  his  clothes,  the  very  attend¬ 
ants  of  the  dead  would  shun  him.  Could  democracy 
function,  shackled  with  such  chains  upon  free  opin¬ 
ion?  Even  I,  while  interviewing  Indian  politicians, 
could  see  that  caste  had  its  effect  on  Indian  courage 
to  speak  their  minds.  Caste  is  enforced  solely  by 
public  opinion,  and  a  people  so  ruled  by  it  in  that 
matter  is  also  afraid  to  speak  up  courageously  on 
other  matters.  P.  W.  Khan,  of  Calcutta,  wrote 
the  Statesman  that  the  “bugbear  of  unpopularity,  in 
the  widest  sense  of  the  word,  has  taken  possession 
of  the  majority  of  Indians  in  every  walk  of  life. 
To  fight  and  to  give  a  crushing  defeat  to  this  bug¬ 
bear  certainly  requires  propaganda  work  in  which 
all  right-thinking  Indians  should  join.”  A  governor 
of  a  great  province  told  me  that  when,  a  few  months 
earlier,  Non-cooperators  who  were  Brahmans  were 
arrested  and  tried  and  found  guilty,  Brahmans  who 
were  not  Non-cooperators  and  who  frowned  on 
them  in  general  came  in  large  numbers  to  urge  the 
governor  that  they  be  pardoned.  Caste  was  stronger 
than  political  faction. 

These  are  examples  of  the  perils  with  which  a 
prospective  democracy  in  India  may  be  threatened. 
Yet  some  progress  has  been  made,  and  the  optimist 

230 


INDIAN  FITNESS  AND  THE  FUTURE 


will  not  wholly  turn  from  his  roseate  vision,  while 
a  forward  movement  is  perceptible.  The  Western 
world  has  struck  off  many  shackles;  why  may  not 
the  Orient,  if  we  will  but  give  her  time? 

But  there  is  still  another  doubt  that  rises  up  in 
the  mind  of  every  traveler  in  the  tropical  regions 
of  India.  One  can  never  get  out  of  one’s  mind  the 
ominous  historical  fact,  that  in  India,  in  the  past, 
any  race  that  came  down  from  the  northwest  and 
conquered  it  had  the  energy  and  spirit  to  build  a 
civilization,  effective  government,  architectural 
monuments,  and  all  before  the  climate  sapped  its 
strength;  but  when  that  time  came,  it  fell  before  a 
new  invasion  from  the  north,  which,  in  its  turn, 
built  a  new  civilization  and  awaited  again  its 
Nemesis. 

The  British  alone,  coming  to  India  by  sea,  returned 
as  individuals  to  their  home,  and,  like  the  giant  of 
old,  renewed  their  strength  on  that  soil.  In  spite  of 
historical  ill-omen,  however,  the  Indians  have  a  very 
natural  and  proper  ambition  for  self-government, 
with  which  every  magnanimous  person  will  sym¬ 
pathize;  but  surely  a  mere  ill-considered  try  for  it, 
at  the  frightful  cost  of  universal  anarchy,  in  a 
country  like  India,  would  be  ghastly  folly.  Indian 

231 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


agitators  appeal  to  us  in  the  name  of  the  Declara¬ 
tion  of  Independence,  the  principles  embodied  in  the 
Federal  Constitution,  by  the  hallowed  phrases  of 
Lincoln’s  Gettysburg  address,  and  by  Roosevelt’s 
slogan  of  the  “square  deal”  to  cooperate  with  them 
to  destroy  the  British  imperialism  and  raise  the 
banner  of  freedom  over  India.  There  is  never  a 
word  as  to  the  results  for  India  herself  of  the 
attainment  of  sudden  release  from  British  control. 

All  prophecy  as  regards  the  political  future  of 
India  is  futile;  but  I  am  convinced  that  the  British 
will  work  out  some  solution  of  their  problems  in 
that  troubled  land,  which  will  put  an  end  to  the 
present  political  ferment.  Even  now,  as  a  result  of 
decline  in  political  disturbance,  there  are  distinct 
signs  of  recovery  on  the  political  side  in  the  morale 
of  all  local  governments  as  well  as  the  Government 
of  India.  With  Gandhi  in  prison  and  treated  with 
the  utmost  consideration,  his  followers  are  divided, 
and  after  good  harvests  all  over  India  they  will  find 
it  more  difficult  to  stir  up  the  masses.  At  the  meet¬ 
ing  of  the  Indian  National  Congress  in  December 
of  1922  that  body  split  into  two  factions,  one  led 
by  C.  R.  Das  declaring  for  taking  part  in  the  next 
elections  and  getting  into  the  assembly,  and  the 

232 


INDIAN  FITNESS  AND  THE  FUTURE 


provincial  councils,  where  they  would  make  Govern¬ 
ment  all  the  trouble  they  could,  the  other  favoring  a 
continuance  of  non-cooperation,  or  the  Gandhi  plan. 
C.  R.  Das  formerly  amassed  great  wealth  as  an 
attorney  in  Calcutta.  He  gave  up  all  to  become  a 
follower  of  Gandhi,  and  resolutely  remained  in  the 
Alipore  jail  for  months  (1921 -1922)  rather  than 
give  up  a  Non-cooperation  campaign  which  had  in 
several  cases  led  to  riots  in  Calcutta  and  therefore  to 
his  arrest.  After  Gandhi’s  imprisonment  he  was 
released  from  jail  and  was  made  president  of  the 
All-India  National  Congress.  When  the  proposal 
was  made  there  to  take  part  in  the  elections  (Novem¬ 
ber,  1923)  and  elect  their  own  members  to  the 
Legislative  Assembly  at  Delhi  and  to  the  Provincial 
Councils  where  they  might  wreck  the  Government 
plans,  Das  supported  the  plan.  It  was  defeated  by 
a  vote  of  1740  to  890,  but  Das,  skillful  politician 
that  he  is,  formed  the  “Congress  Khilafat  Swarajya 
Party”  which  aims  at  bringing  the  majority  of  the 
All-India  National  Congress  to  its  views.  Even  if 
the  great  Bengal  leader  succeeds  it  is  hard  to  say 
whether  he  or  the  opposing  Non-cooperation  faction 
will  be  most  annoying  to  Government. 

C.  R.  Das  is  a  Nationalist  of  the  idealistic  sort. 

233 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


As  he  says,  “The  Nationality  of  which  I  am  speak¬ 
ing  must  not  be  confused  with  the  conception  of 
Nationality  as  its  exists  in  Europe  to-day.  Nation¬ 
alism  in  Europe  is  an  aggressive  nationalism,  a  selfish 
nationalism,  a  commercial  nationalism  of  gain  and 
loss.  The  gain  of  France  is  the  loss  of  Germany, 
and  the  gain  of  Germany  is  the  loss  of  France.  .  .  . 
I  contend  that  each  nationality  constitutes  a  par¬ 
ticular  stream  of  the  great  unity;  but  no  nation  can 
fulfill  itself  unless  and  until  it  becomes  itself  and  at 
the  same  time  realizes  its  identity  with  humanity.” 
Moreover,  if  self-rule  comes  to  India,  he  wants  it 
the  rule  of  the  masses,  real  democracy.  He  does 
not  want  the  two  per  cent  of  India’s  millions  who 
are  educated  to  rule  all  the  rest.  In  his  own  words — 
“98  per  cent  of  the  population  are  ill-fed;  their 
lives  are  a  long  drawn  struggle.  To  quote  the 
words  of  a  Lieut.-Governor,  ‘2  per  cent  of  the 
population  in  India  cannot  win  Swaraj.  In  place 
of  white  men  you  will  have  brown  men.’  To  my 
mind  bureaucracy  is  bureaucracy,  whether  it  is 
white  bureaucracy  or  brown  bureaucracy.  That  is 
why  I  have  always  claimed  Swaraj  for  the  masses. 
Democracy  has  never  yet  been  tried  in  the  world. 
Swaraj  must  be  for  the  entire  population  and  not 

234 


INDIAN  FITNESS  AND  THE  FUTURE 


for  any  particular  class,  however  gifted  that  class 
may  be.  Nowhere  in  the  world,  in  not  a  single 
country  in  Europe,  have  you  got  democracy.  When¬ 
ever  there  is  a  strike,  the  military  is  called  in.  Do 
you  ever  realize  what  ill-fed  population  means?  It 
means  diseased  population.  What  right  has  the 
Government  and  the  Middle  Class  to  say  to  the  vast 
population  of  India  that  you  will  not  be  allowed 
access  to  knowledge  and  culture  ?”  He  does  not  wish 
the  Middle  Class  alone  to  win  self-rule,  but  he  calls 
to  the  masses,  “your  own  hands  must  construct  the 
Temple  of  Freedom.  I  call  upon  you  to  feel  within 
your  heart  of  hearts  that  you  are  the  real  proprietors 
of  India.” 

A  most  lovable  Scotch  missionary,  who  entertained 
me  at  Poona,  and  who  went  with  me  to  a  meeting  of 
the  Deccan  Liberal  Club  there,  came  away  shaking 
his  head  sadly,  saying:  “The  fire  has  been  lighted; 
the  flame  will  never  go  out.  England  has  lost  India.” 
I  do  not  now  agree  with  him,  though  at  the  moment  I 
did.  The  men  who  are  really  in  power  in  India — 
Lord  Reading,  Lord  Willingdon,  Sir  Harcourt  But¬ 
ler,  Sir  William  Marris,  Sir  George  Lloyd,  and  many 
others — are  right-minded;  they  wish  to  do  the  right 
thing,  and  if  the  people  at  home,  in  England,  will  let 

235 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


them  alone,  keep  their  hands  off,  a  wise  solution  will 
be  found  by  those  actually  in  India,  who  understand 
all  the  subtle  influences,  the  unique  conditions,  and 
the  almost  morbid  sensitiveness  of  the  Oriental  mind. 
Under  their  guidance  India  will  in  time  rule  herself, 
but  will  remain  one  of  the  great  self-governing  coun¬ 
tries  of  the  British  Commonwealth  of  Nations. 

It  was  unfortunate  that  the  visit  of  the  Prince  of 
Wales  focused  English  attention  on  India  at  a  time 
when  it  was  important  that  there  should  be  no  cen¬ 
sorious  comment  from  British  sources  on  the  way 
new  reforms  were  working.  The  rising  tide  of  criti¬ 
cism  in  England,  which  swept  Montagu  out  of  office, 
is  bitterly  resented  by  Nationalist  leaders.  The 
Indians  are  most  sensitive  to  any  indications  that 
London  means  to  put  any  obstacles  in  the  path  of 
their  political  advance  under  the  new  act.  Any  sug¬ 
gestion  that  Parliament  is  saying:  “Oh,  we  did  not 
mean  to  go  so  far  as  that  when  we  gave  India  the 
new  scheme, ”  is  maddening  to  men  who  think  that 
they  have  not  been  given  enough.  The  fall  of  Mr. 
Montagu,  who  stood  for  the  new  era  in  the  Indian 
mind,  made  more  stir  in  India  than  the  arrest  of 
Gandhi ;  for  many  interpreted  that  to  mean  reaction 
at  Whitehall.  Lord  Curzon’s  talk  about  “a  subordi- 

236 


INDIAN  FITNESS  AND  THE  FUTURE 


nate  branch  of  the  Imperial  Government,  six  thou¬ 
sand  miles  away,”  and  English  criticism  of  the  per¬ 
sonnel  of  the  Delhi  Legislature,  simply  pour  oil  on  the 
flames  of  Nationalism  and  race  feeling  in  India. 
When  in  early  August,  1922,  Lloyd  George  discussed 
the  situation  in  the  House  of  Commons  with  the  par¬ 
ticular  aim  of  reassuring  the  young  Englishmen  who 
contemplate  entering  the  Indian  Civil  Service,  he 
spoke  of  British  officialdom  as  the  “steel  frame” 
which  held  Indian  society  together,  and  he  left  the 
suspicion  in  hypersensitive  Indian  minds  that  for  an 
almost  unlimited  time  he  expected  the  presence  of 
British  officials  to  be  necessary.  This  seemed  to  the 
Indian  politician  to  retract  the  Government  promise 
to  advance  by  definite  stages  to  the  Indianization  of 
the  Civil  Service.  He  still  further  aroused  their 
wrath  and  suspicion  by  talking  of  the  Government 
of  India  Act  as  an  “experiment.”  That  was  hastily 
interpreted  to  mean  that  the  whole  plan  might  be  jetti¬ 
soned  any  day  if  the  British  Government  chose  to 
think  it  a  failure.  Lloyd  George  doubtless  meant 
merely  that  the  introduction  of  Western  political 
forms  in  an  Asiatic  country  was  an  “experiment,” 
but  any  well-informed  Indian  official  would  have  told 
him  it  was  unwise  to  use  that  expression.  Every 

237 


INDIA  IN  FERMENT 


Indian  editor  was  incensed  by  it,  and  the  cauldron 
of  discontent  boiled  ominously  for  weeks  after  the 
speech.  The  moral  plainly  drawn  from  the  incident 
is  that  English  public  men  should  have  the  same  care 
when  they  express  themselves  upon  Indian  affairs 
that  they  are  accustomed  to  exercise  when  they  touch 
the  affairs  of  the  Dominions.  To  say,  as  one  did, 
that  the  Indian  Councils  “are  swamping  India  under 
a  flood  of  ineffable  bosh”  is  not  only  to  speak  reckless 
untruth,  but  is  positively  laying  a  powder-train  to 
destroy  the  Empire.  This  great  imperial  problem 
must  be  solved  in  India. 

“I  wish  I  could  be  sure  that  the  House  of  Com¬ 
mons  really  understood  that,”  a  distinguished  British 
statesman  in  India  exclaimed  to  me.  Indeed,  one 
fears  sometimes  that  there  are  still  too  few  in  Eng¬ 
land  who  realize  that  the  Government  of  India  Act 
can  only  be  used  in  cooperation  with  the  Indians,  and 
that  every  London  interference  or  unfavorable  com¬ 
ment  only  makes  that  more  difficult.  The  genie  of 
political  liberty  is  out  of  the  bottle,  and  no  ministerial 
magic  can  thrust  it  back  in  again.  It  is  not  within 
the  power  of  any  party  in  England  to  arrest  the 
movement  of  political  opinion  in  India.  In  the  pres¬ 
ent  stage,  the  temper  of  that  opinion  is  one  of  the 

238 


INDIAN  FITNESS  AND  THE  FUTURE 


vital  factors ;  and  any  attempt  to  reassert  the  control 
of  the  Imperial  Parliament  too  obviously  will  have 
a  bad  effect. 

England  may  have  come  too  slowly  to  her  present 
policy  toward  India,  but  those  who  know  the  truth 
will  not  chide  her  for  the  way  in  which  she  has  done 
things  there  since  her  policy  was  once  determined. 
She  even  ventured  upon  a  pure  experiment,  dyarchy, 
rather  than  stand  motionless  with  indecision.  In  the 
hour  of  victory  she  kept  the  vows  made  in  the  midst 
of  her  war  trials.  She  has  at  least  put  India  in  the 
way  of  winning  self-government  for  herself. 


INDEX 


Afghans,  90,  91,  105,  168, 
190. 

Agra,  201. 

Ahmedabad,  96,  131,  201. 

Aiyer,  Sir  P.  S.  Siva- 
swami,  44,  45,  49,  134. 

Ali,  Shaukat  and  Ma¬ 
homet,  48,  90,  122. 

Aligarh,  116. 

Alwar,  Maharaja  of,  64- 
69,  77,  82,  83,  99,  213. 

Amballal,  Mr.,  96,  97. 

“Amritsar  Affair,”  141- 
143,  T44- 

Andrews,  C.  F.,  98,  156. 

Army  in  India,  42,  43,  44, 
45,  50,  52,  87,  90;  cost 
of,  45,  55,  162,  167. 

Arya  Somaj,  209,  217. 

Assam,  60,  71. 

Ayer,  T.  V.  Seshagiri,  25, 
49.  78,  79- 

Banerji,  Sir  Surendra- 
nath,  56,  84,  134,  193. 

Bardoli,  129. 

Baroda,  Gaekwar  of,  70, 
76,  77- 


Benares,  2,  35,  206. 

Bengal,  19,  23,  27,  28,  34, 
56,  59,  60,  71,  86,  120, 
152,  176. 

Besant,  Mrs.  Annie,  81, 
1 12,  1 35-1 39;  rebukes 
Indians,  200. 

Bihar  and  Orissa,  71,  202. 

Bikanir,  Maharaja  of,  70. 

Bombay,  19,  42,  56,  71, 
89,  97,  100,  108,  126, 
130,  131,  133,  150,  176, 
187,  190,  205,  207. 

Bose,  Sir  Jagadis  Chandra, 
202,  203. 

Brahma,  213. 

Brahman,  76,  107,  160, 
205,  212;  education  in 
hands  of,  173,  174,  175, 
177;  of  the  Hindu 
temple,  201 ;  the  divine 
right  of,  213,  214,  223; 
mass  opinion,  214,  215; 
hopes  to  succeed  Eng¬ 
lish  in  power,  215;  at¬ 
tacked  by  new  sects, 
217;  caste,  221;  devise 
caste  rules,  222;  defiled 


241 


242 


INDEX 


by  “untouchables,”  224, 
226. 

Brahmo  Somaj,  217. 

“British  Arrogance,”  149- 
154,  -192. 

British  Colonies,  Indians 
in,  162. 

British  Government  (Im¬ 
perial  Government),  7, 
9,  n,  28, 32, 43, 58, 64, 

67,79,  90,  93,  :_43 ;  edu- 
cational  policy  in  India, 
1 70-1 72;  Indians  pre¬ 
fer  to  other  govern¬ 
ments,  191 ;  rescues 
India,  193,  197;  danger 
of  interference  in  In¬ 
dia,  23=5-237,  239. 

“British  India,”  2;  pro¬ 
posal  to  turn  over  to 
Princes,  23 ;  people  in, 
79;  over-governed,  80. 

Buddhist,  Philosophy,  194; 
number  in  India,  217. 

Budget,  of  1922,  41,  43- 
47- 

Bureaucracy,  88,  120,  122, 
124,  234. 

Burke,  Edmund,  195. 

Butler,  Sir  Harcourt,  235. 

\ 

Caliphate.  (See  Khilafat.) 

Capital,  British,  52,  61,  62, 
63,  64,  90,  92;  why  it 
enters  India,  163;  In¬ 


dian,  163 ;  builds  Indian 
railways,  180. 

Caste,  89,  107,  1 12,  21 1, 
213,  216;  affects  Euro¬ 
peans,  158-160,  173; 

Hindu  taints  Moslem 
with,  217;  general  dis¬ 
cussion,  221-230;  basis 
of  Hindu  religion,  67, 
221 ;  number  of  castes, 
221 ;  four  main,  221 ; 
impossibility  of  change, 
222 ;  devised  to  exalt 
Brahman,  223 ;  vagaries 
of  system,  223-225  ;  how 
enforced,  225 ;  essentials 
not  disappearing,  226, 
227;  Tagore  and  edu¬ 
cated  classes  oppose, 
227-229;  effect,  if  with¬ 
drawn,  229 ;  probable  ef¬ 
fect  on  democratic  gov¬ 
ernment,  229,  230. 

Central  provinces,  71. 

“Certification,”  effect,  19; 
use,  27,  28,  46,  47. 

Chandavarkar,  Sir  Nara- 
yan,  72,  79,  84,  86,  no, 
in,  154,  206. 

“ Charka ”  (see  spinning 
wheel). 

Chauri  Chaura,  108,  128, 
129,  130. 

Chelmsford,  Lord,  14,  71 ; 
as  Viceroy,  proclaims 


INDEX 


243 


martial  law,  142;  blame 
for  “Amritsar  horror,” 
143- 

Chirol,  Sir  Valentine,  14. 

Christians,  in  India,  217. 

“Civil  disobedience,”  4, 
108,  no,  1 17,  128;  non¬ 
payment  of  taxes,  129. 

Climate,  of  India,  effect, 
57, 160, 161, 231. 

Collector  and  Magistrate, 
duties,  6,  7,  8,  79,  80; 
conduct,  152. 

Colonies,  Indians  in,  53. 

Communal  representation, 
20,  21,  22. 

Congress  Khilafat  Swa¬ 
raj  ya  Party,  223. 

Connaught,  Duke  of,  25, 
40. 

Conservatives,  political 
views,  84,  91 ;  extreme 
reactionaries,  92. 

Constantinople,  145. 

Council  of  Princes,  70. 

Council  of  State,  3,  93; 
make  up,  18,  26. 

Crump,  L.  M.,  Resident  at 
Baroda,  190. 

Curtis,  Lionel,  8,  13,  46, 
171 ;  visits  India,  14;  on 
problem  in  India,  189, 
190. 

Curzon,  Lord,  187,  201, 
204,  236. 


Cutch,  Maharao  of,  76. 

Dacca,  120. 

Darbar,  3,  180. 

Das,  C.  R.,  93,  121,  122, 
164,  233-235. 

Deccan  Liberal  Club,  217, 

235- 

Delhi,  2 ;  fort,  3 ;  Legisla¬ 
tive  Assembly  at,  25,  26, 
27,  36>  38>  40,  49  i  Har¬ 
tal  at,  141  ;  Darbar,  180; 
architectural  remains, 
201. 

Democracy,  in  India,  21, 
33,  67,  68,  69,  78,  181 ; 
probable  effect  of  caste 
upon,  229,  230;  C.  R. 
Das’  idea  of,  234,  235. 
Democratic  Party  (In¬ 
dian),  49,  54. 
“Depressed  Classes,”  (see 
“untouchables”). 

Duke,  Sir  William,  14. 
Dwarkadas,  Jamnadas,  50, 
134* 

“Dyarchy,”  14,  19,  20,  26, 
27,  31-  63,  88.  239. 
Dyer,  General,  142,  143, 

144. 

Education,  in  India,  33,  35, 
228,  229 ;  British  policy, 
170-178;  criticized,  200. 
Elphinstone,  M.,  170. 


244 


INDEX 


Emerson,  Mr.,  Commis¬ 
sioner  at  Dacca,  152. 

English,  language,  54-56, 
172,  176,  179. 

Exclusion  laws,  156,  162. 

Executive  Council,  make 
up  of  Viceroy’s,  18; 
power  to  certify,  18,  19. 

Famine,  in  India,  162,  165, 
166,  180. 

Filipinos,  90,  124;  Ameri¬ 
can  experience  in  gov¬ 
erning,  188,  189. 

Fyzabad,  115. 

Gandhi,  Mohandas  Ka- 
ramchand,  59,  95-114; 
relations  with  Malaviya, 
12,  14;  arrest,  17,  108, 
129;  attitude  to  native 
states,  78 ;  policy,  87, 
94, 107, 108,  n8, 131; 
masters  Indian  Con¬ 
gress,  90,  93 ;  masters 
Ali  brothers,  91 ;  opin¬ 
ions  of,  95,  98,  99;  re¬ 
ligious  appeal,  99,  108, 
no,  iii;  appearance, 
98,  99;  ideas,  1 00-108; 
education,  106;  accom¬ 
plishment,  107;  impris¬ 
onment,  109;  relations 
with  Viceroy,  106,  109, 
no;  “reincarnation  of 


Vishnu,”  no;  religious 
man,  in;  followers, 
character  of,  hi,  112, 
113,  120-125,  158;  ex- 
ploited  by  charlatans, 
hi,  112;  frowns  on  de¬ 
ceit,  112;  Tagore  on, 
114;  advocates  civil  dis¬ 
obedience,  117;  urges 
care  of  Prince  of  Wales, 
126;  fasts  because  of 
violence,  127,  128,  129, 
130;  simple  minded, 
127,  146;  confesses  his 
responsibility  for  riots, 
131,  133;  Mrs.  Naidu, 
on  trial,  133;  effect  of 
arrest,  134;  opposition 
to,  134,  135,  137;  Row- 
latt  Act,  140;  denounces 
British  government, 
143 ;  unites  Hindu  and 
Moslem,  146,  147;  op¬ 
poses  blaming  English 
for  all  India’s  troubles, 
147;  opposed  to  Euro¬ 
pean  science,  176,  177; 
influence  on  school  boys, 
178;  asks  about  negro 
problem,  187;  supports 
caste,  227,  228 ;  opposes 
“untouchability,”  228  ; 
how  treated  in  prison, 
232. 

Giridih,  116. 


INDEX 


245 


Gokhale,  Mr.,  173;  on 
British  rule,  181 ;  on 
caste,  229. 

Gour,  Dr.  H.  S.,  49,  57. 

Gourlay,  W.  R.,  Private 
Secretary  to  the  Gover¬ 
nor  of  Bengal,  161. 

Greece,  145. 

Gupta,  President  of  Cal¬ 
cutta  municipal  council, 

T55* 

Government  of  India,  4; 
reform  in,  14;  to  whom 
responsible,  18;  accused 
of  buying  ministers,  28 ; 
army  under,  44,  45 ;  re¬ 
peals  Rowlatt  Acts,  48; 
criticism,  58,  59,  121- 
124,  162-167;  powers 
as  to  princes,  74,  75  ;  ar¬ 
rests  Ali  brothers,  91 ; 
combats  famine,  100, 
166;  duty  as  to  Gandhi, 
108,  1 14;  arrests  Gan¬ 
dhi,  132,  134;  attack  on 
revenues,  118;  Indian 
arraignment,  1 40- 1 69 ; 
comment  on  criticisms, 
179,  180;  character  in 
the  past,  182,  183,  186; 
nature  of  British  rule, 
187,  188;  American  ex¬ 
perience  in  Philippines 
warning  to,  188;  prob¬ 
able  result  of  British 


withdrawal,  190;  service 
to  India,  205,  216;  over¬ 
cautious,  207;  grapples 
with  suttee  and  child 
murder,  208,  209;  legis¬ 
lates  against  child  mar¬ 
riages,  209;  Indian  re¬ 
spect  for,  219;  officials 
understand  Indian  sensi¬ 
tiveness,  236. 

Government  of  India,  Act, 
early  stages  of,  12,  14; 
Sir  George  Lloyd  on, 
16;  British  purpose,  17, 
18;  provisions,  18,  42; 
provincial  governments 
under,  19;  divides  sov¬ 
ereignty,  20 ;  aim,  22 ; 
Parliament  passes,  25 ; 
how  carried  out,  27,  28, 
32;  criticism,  29,  30,  31, 
33,  44,  63,  85 ;  defense, 
3L  32,  33;  Viceroy’s 
powers  under,  43 ;  as¬ 
sembly’s  powers,  44 ; 
opinion  of  young  offi¬ 
cers,  58,  59 ;  favored  by 
official  class,  60,  61 ;  dis¬ 
liked  by  British  mer¬ 
chants  and  manufac¬ 
turers,  62 ;  American 
view,  62 ;  native  princes 
criticise,  64-70 ;  called 
inadequate,  87 ;  difficul¬ 
ties  of  carrying  out, 


246 


INDEX 


140;  Gandhi  denounces 
supporters,  147;  Lloyd 
George  speaks  of,  as 
“experiment,”  237;  can 
only  be  used  in  coopera¬ 
tion  with  the  Indians, 
238. 

Governors,  in  Council,  19, 

27,  30,  60,  61,  72. 

Great  Britain,  critics,  5, 

28,  42,  67;  answer  to 
critics,  179. 

Griffeth,  Police  Inspector, 
99,  105. 

Hailey,  Sir  Malcolm,  37. 

Hall,  H.  Fielding,  7,  173. 

Haq,  Fazlul,  145. 

Hartal,  112,  126,  127,  141. 

Hastings,  Warren,  195. 

Herrin,  Illinois,  142,  187, 
216. 

Hindu,  55,  66,  67,  76,  86, 
89,  91,  107,  1 12,  1 13, 
126,  146,  156,  177,  179; 
and  Mohammedan,  190, 
216,  217;  world’s  spir¬ 
itual  teacher,  193,  196, 
198,  200;  social  organ¬ 
ization,  197,  221 ;  re¬ 
ligion  of,  206-215; 
suttee  rite,  207 ;  child 
murder,  208 ;  infant 
marriage,  209 ;  temple 
life,  210;  idolatrous  fol¬ 


lowers,  211-213;  sects, 
213;  caste,  the  founda¬ 
tion  of,  67,  221,  227; 
permanence  of  caste, 
222. 

House  of  Lords,  approves 
Dyer’s  action,  143. 

Hunter  Commission,  142, 
143- 

Illiteracy,  in  India,  175, 
228. 

India,  1,  28,  90,  91 ;  loyal 
in  the  Great  War,  13; 
attitude  of  governors, 
19,  61 ;  sense  of  citizen¬ 
ship  in,  21 ;  law  and 
order  in,  25 ;  population 
and  literacy,  33,  34,  175, 
228 ;  living  conditions, 
34,  35  ;  dominion  status, 

45.  60,  93,  94,  136; 

gloomy  prophecy,  62, 
190,  235 ;  Alwar’s  hope 
for,  68,  82,  83 ;  Gandhi 
on,  100;  permanence  of 
civilization,  102,  192; 

backwardness,  102,  103, 
195;  mobs  in,  126;  de¬ 
mands,  135,  136;  Annie 
Besant’s  appeal,  138; 
exploited  (  ?),  163;  edu¬ 
cation  in,  170-178,  202; 
antiquity,  192;  unity, 
176,  179,  180;  used  to 


INDEX 


autocratic  rule,  186;  if 
British  should  leave, 
190-192,  232;  rescued 
by  British,  193;  superi¬ 
ority  of  civilization (  ?), 

194. 198-201. 203, 227; 

care  of  historical  monu- 
ments,  200,  201,  204; 
importation  of  Western 
culture,  202 ;  contrasts 
in  civilization,  202,  203  ; 
variety  of  its  life,  205 ; 
fitness  for  self-govern¬ 
ment,  206,  219,  220, 232 ; 
religion  in,  206-218; 
hope  of  escape  from  re¬ 
ligious  superstition,  218 ; 
climate,  effect  on,  231 ; 
political  future,  232, 236. 
Indian  Agitator,  5,  8,  11, 
28,  29,  33,  80,  87,  88, 
89,  90,  107,  1 16,  125, 
1 47- 1 49,  162,  174,  200, 
219. 

Indian  Art,  201,  204. 
Indian  Civil  Service,  4,  6, 

7,  8;  in  former  times, 

8,  152;  criticism,  30, 

59,  88 ;  Indianization  of, 
52,  58,.  168,  219,  237; 
late  attitude  toward,  59, 

60,  130;  character  of 
members,  153;  discour¬ 
aged,  158;  salaries  in, 
162,  166,  167. 


247 

Indian  Councils  Act,  9 ; 
effect,  10. 

Indian  legislators,  conduct, 

3E  44,  55  5  debating 

powers,  56. 

Indian  Ministers,  criticism 
of,  28,  159,  220;  diffi¬ 
culties  of,  29,  30;  in 
Viceroy's  Council,  40 ; 
as  administrators,  56, 
220)  Indian  attitude  to¬ 
ward,  220. 

Indian  National  Congress, 
11,  90,  136,  137;  meet¬ 
ing  at  Ahmedabad,  96; 
Working  Committee, 
128,  129;  use  English 
in  debates,  176;  meeting, 
December,  1922,  232. 

Indian  Science,  172,  202, 
203. 

Indore,  79,  81. 

Islam,  (see  Mohamme¬ 
dans). 

Iyengar,  S.  Srinavasa,  98, 
106,  1 13. 

Jains,  217. 

Jayakar,  M.  R.,  99,  113. 

Jeejeebhoy,  Sir  Jamsetjee, 
50,  93,  205. 

Jinnah,  Mohammed  Ali, 
181. 

Jodhpur,  77. 


INDEX 


248 

Kasem,  Moulvi  Abul,  50. 

Kathiawar  States,  77. 

Kemal,  Mustapha,  91,  145. 

Khaparde,  G.  S.,  Hon., 
192. 

Khilafat,  116,  145,  146. 

Kshatriya,  221,  222. 

Legislative  Assembly,  3, 
36-57,  87,  93 ;  how  con¬ 
stituted,  18;  meets,  25, 
26;  attendance,  36,  41, 
57;  appearance,  36,  37; 
President  of,  37 ;  con¬ 
duct,  38,  41 ;  attitude 
toward  British  Govern¬ 
ment,  39,  40,  54 ;  Budget 
Action,  41-43 ;  respon¬ 
sibility,  44-48;  rejection 
of  bills,  47 ;  parties  in, 
49 ;  Moslem  and  Hindu, 
55,  56;  debates  in  Eng¬ 
lish,  54,  176;  plans  for 
next  election  to,  233. 

Legislative  Council,  9 ; 
make  up,  19;  in  Bengal, 
28. 

Lindsay,  James  H.,  Col¬ 
lector  at  Dacca,  6,  120, 
152. 

Lloyd,  Sir  George,  Gover¬ 
nor  of  Bombay,  16,  17, 
235 ;  takes  responsibility 
for  arrest  of  Gandhi,  17. 


Lloyd  George,  David,  237. 

Lucknow,  2. 

Lugard,  Sir  Frederick,  23, 
24. 

Macaulay,  T.  B.,  171-175. 

Macnicol,  Reverend  Nicol, 
235- 

Madras,  19,  21,  56,  71,  89, 
100,  108,  176;  riot,  1 27, 
128, 130, 131, 187. 

Mahabharata,  197. 

Maharajas,  3  ;  plan  to  turn 
rule  of  India  over  to,  23, 
24;  attitude  of  Indians 
towards,  24,  25,  78,  79, 
81;  bill  to  protect,  47; 
opinion  of  Government 
of  India  Act,  64-70; 
character,  70-82 ;  plan 
expansion,  81 ;  meet  at 
Darbar,  180. 

Malabar ,  56,  108,  116. 

Malaviya,  Madan  Mohan, 
11,  12,  40,  121. 

Malegaon,  108,  116. 

Manu,  Laws  of,  209. 

Marris,  Sir  William,  13, 
14,  19,  235;  on  “dy¬ 
archy,”  20 ;  on  educa¬ 
tional  policy  in  India, 
171. 

Mendicants,  Indian,  200. 

Minorities,  representation 
of,  21,  22. 


INDEX 


Minto,  Lord,  75. 

Moderates,  political  views, 
84,  85,  86;  composition, 
92. 

“Mofussil”  (country  dis¬ 
tricts),  88,  89. 

Mohammedans,  86;  repre¬ 
sentation,  21 ;  in  Legis¬ 
lative  assembly,  55,  56; 
suspect  Hindu,  89,  90; 
unite  with  Gandhi,  91, 
126,  146;  political  fac¬ 
tion,  92 ;  riot  in  Madras, 
128;  Khilafat  agitation, 
145 ;  Gandhi  embraces 
cause,  146,  147;  eat 

beef,  165 ;  effort  to 
reconcile  with  Hindu, 
179 ;  attitude  toward 
Hindu,  190,  215,  216, 
217;  number  in  India, 
209;  influence  in  India, 

215,  216. 

Monragu,  Secretary  of 
State,  14,  58,  59;  char¬ 
acter,  1 5 ;  resignation, 
48;  effect  of  fall,  236. 

Montagu -Chelmsford  Re¬ 
port,  14,  22. 

Moplah,  rebellion,  116, 

216. 

Morley,  Lord,  62,  15 1, 
204. 

Morley-Minto  Reforms,  9. 


249 

Moslem,  (see  Mohamme¬ 
dans). 

Mukherji,  Sir  Ashutosh, 
201. 

Mysore,  Maharaja  of,  70, 
76. 

Naidu,  Mrs.,  Indian  poet¬ 
ess,  133. 

Nair,  Sir  Sankaran,  155. 

“Natives  States,”  condi¬ 
tions,  24,  25,  74,  75. 

“Native  States,”  70,  71, 
77 y  78,  79,  80,  81. 

Nationalism,  4,  234. 

Nationalists,  Indian,  8,  29, 
77 y  87,  I4L  237;  com¬ 
position,  93 ;  methods, 
93;  resent  imitations  of 
West,  157,  158;  claim 
superiority,  195 ;  C.  R. 
Das’  views,  234. 

“National  Liberal  Party,” 
formed,  49 ;  members, 
50;  aims,  50-54. 

Nehru,  Motilal,  119,  122. 

“New  India,”  Mrs.  Bes- 
ant’s  paper,  81,  138. 

Non-Brahmans,  21,  160, 
177. 

Non-Cooperation,  12,  29, 
92,  107,  108,  1 13;  Ta¬ 
gore  on,  134;  Annie 
Besant  on,  136,  137; 
Gandhi  organizes,  147. 


250 


INDEX 


Non-Cooperators,  95 ;  stay 
away  from  polls,  26,  27 ; 
criticism  by,  47,  77 ; 

split  in  party,  92,  93; 
methods  of,  1 15-120, 
125,  128;  results  of  agi¬ 
tation,  1 15-120,  129; 

seek  imprisonment,  118, 
1 19. 

Non-violence,  94,  104, 

108,  1 15-120,  126. 

O’Dwyer,  Sir  Michael, 
142. 

Orientalizers,  199,  200. 

Padisson,  George  W., 
Commissioner  of  Labor 
in  Madras,  6,  224;  ef¬ 
forts  in  behalf  of  “un¬ 
touchables,”  225. 

Parsis,  representation,  21 ; 
business  talent,  86;  in 
Bombay  riot,  126;  fate 
of,  if  British  leave  In¬ 
dia,  190;  Towers  of  Si¬ 
lence,  207;  number,  217. 

Parties,  political,  91,  92. 

Patiala,  Maharaja  of,  70. 

Peel,  Viscount,  15. 

Philippines  (see  Filipi¬ 
nos). 

Pratt,  F.,  Commissioner  at 
AhmedabadJ  132. 


Prince  of  Wales,  2,  3,  126, 
236. 

Princes,  Indian  (see  Ma¬ 
harajas). 

Provincial  Governments, 
powers,  19,  80;  legisla¬ 
tive  councils  of,  27. 

Provincial  Councils,  10,  56, 
93;  debate  in  English, 
176;  unwise  criticism  of, 
238. 

Punjab,  71,  141-143,  216. 

Puri,  Raja  of,  74. 

“Race  Hatred,”  4,  48,  78, 
108,  155,  237;  Indians 
accuse  British  of  arro¬ 
gance,  149,  150,  15 1 ; 
how  shown,  157,  158;  in 
America,  187. 

Rai,  Lala  Lajpat,  28,  173. 

Railways,  State  Owner¬ 
ship,  53- 

Ramayana,  197,  198. 

Rangachariar,  Rao  Baha- 
dur,  T.,37, 39,49, 54,55. 

Reading,  Lord,  Viceroy  of 
India,  235 ;  character, 
12,  109,  no,  relations 
with  Montagu,  15  ;  criti¬ 
cism,  43—46 ;  interview 
with  Gandhi,  106,  109; 
convictions,  no;  pro¬ 
claims  race  equality  in 
India,  151. 


INDEX 


Religion,  in  politics,  21, 
209 ;  power  in  India,  67, 
68,  99,  177;  fanaticism, 
141,  205,  207,  affects  so¬ 
cial  relations,  156,  157; 
effect  of  education  on, 
170,  173;  material  as¬ 
pects  of,  195;  general 
discussion,  206-218 ;  sut¬ 
tee  rite,  208 ;  child  mur¬ 
der,  208;  substitute  for 
nationalities,  217. 

“Repressive  Measures,” 
41,  114,  1 15,  122. 

“Reserved  Subjects/*  19, 
27,  29,  30. 

Residents,  at  the  court  of 
Indian  Princes,  70,  71, 

72,  73>  74,  75. 

Ripon,  Lord,  plans  for  In¬ 
dia,  183-186. 

Risley,  Sir.  H.  H.,  202, 
226,  227,  229. 

Ronaldshay,  Lord,  Gover¬ 
nor  of  Bengal,  27,  28. 

“Round  Table”  Group,  13, 
14. 

Rowlatt  Acts,  48,  140,  146. 

Roy,  Ananda  Chandra,  86. 

Saklatvalla,  Mr.,  155. 

Samarth,  N.  M.,  50. 

Sanskrit  Literature,  196, 
197. 


25i 

Sapru,  Sir  Tej  Bahadur, 

1 57; 

Sastri,  Rt.  Hon.,  V.  S., 
Srinivasa,  II,  93,  134. 
Secretary  of  State,  as  re¬ 
former,  9 ;  policy  of 
Lord  Peel,  15;  Council, 
18;  responsible,  44. 
“Servants  of  India/*  212. 
Shekhanagar,  120,  125, 

126. 

Sinha,  Lord,  84,  157,  203. 
Sikhs,  representation,  21 ; 

number,  217. 

Simla,  38,  49. 

Social  relations,  English 
and  Indian,  154,  155, 
156;  difficulties  of,  156- 
158;  importance,  160. 
“Soul  force/*  104,  105, 

106,  108,  147. 
Sovereignty,  division  of, 

20. 

Spinning  wheel,  Gandhi’s 
emblem,  108,  117,  118, 
178. 

Sudra,  221. 

“Swaraj”  (self  rule),  1, 
83,  84,  85,  87,  89,  103, 

107,  113,  118,  125,  135; 
should  come  gradually, 
220,  221 ;  the  kind  de¬ 
sired  by  C.  R.  Das,  234. 

Sydenham,  Lord,  81. 


252 


INDEX 


Tagore,  Rabindranath, 
1 14,  134,  147,  173,  203, 
206 ;  on  Dyer  debates, 
143,  144;  on  race  con¬ 
flict,  162;  on  British 
government,  191 ;  op¬ 
posed  to  caste,  227. 

Taj  Mahal,  201. 

Tatas,  86,  155,  163. 

Taxes,  41,  42,  162. 

Theosophists,  199,  200. 

Tilak,  Bal  Gangadhar,  173. 

Titles,  granted  to  Indians, 
29. 

“Transferred  Subjects/’ 
19,  27,  29,  30. 

Turkey,  145,  146. 

United  Provinces,  27,  71. 

“Untouchables,”  53,  76, 
107,  108,  217;  restric¬ 
tions  upon,  224,  British 
government  tries  to  help, 
225 ;  numbers,  225. 

Upanishads,  199. 

Vaisya,  221. 

Viceroy,  as  reformer,  9, 


183-186;  Legislative 
Council  of,  10;  powers 
under  Government  of 
India  Act,  30,  80;  Ex¬ 
ecutive  Council,  37,  46; 
Budget  action,  42,  43- 
47 ;  relations  with  native 
states,  7 1,  78,  82;  Lord 
Curzon  as,  204. 

Vincent,  Sir  William,  37, 

39, 48, 49. 

Willingdon,  Lord,  gover¬ 
nor  of  Madras,  17,  154, 
235. 

Whyte,  Sir  Frederick, 
President  of  the  Legis¬ 
lative  Assembly,  37,  38, 

39. 49, 57. 61, 156. 

Wood-Forbes  report,  on 
Philippine  Government, 
188,  189. 

Yogi,  196,  198,  199,  200, 
210,  218. 

Zacharias,  Dr.,  212. 

Zamindars,  86. 


